It's a case of, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."
My take on it is that JC is applying "The Secret."
M.
Callahan Spinning Video from DragonCon
- Thread starter Garrette
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jim callahan
- Status
It's a case of, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about."
My take on it is that JC is applying "The Secret."
M.
desertgal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,198
It's almost scary to think what "helping me" might mean. Please tell us you aren't preying on an elderly woman?
chran
Muse
According to some commercials shown before the YouTube-videos posted previously here, "someone will die" on October 31st.
Callaham evidently tired of only contacting Raymond Chandler or whoever.
desertgal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,198
Even creepier...
Perhaps law enforcement should keep an eye on this guy? Or, at least, be made aware of his statement above?
tesscaline
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2008
- Messages
- 4,024
"Someone"? That's awfully vague. Especially given that on any given day, LOTS of people die. I mean, how can that prediction possibly be wrong? I'd be more impressed if the prediction was that "no one will die" on october 31.
desertgal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,198
I somehow doubt that Jim is a murderer. Though I admit that his claim did give me pause.
Actually, I was thinking assisted euthanasia. I know, not likely, but his statement does make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
I live in Charleston, as well...perhaps I'll keep an eye on the local news the day after Halloween.
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
He says in the $1 million challenge forum that he may be wanting to test for the MDC. Breaking news.
Jim Callahan
Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 249
No I am exposing Wagg for running his mouth about something he knows nothing about in my opinion.
He said my claim would be easy to test and now he runs from explaining.
But if they want to monitor a dying person for me on Halloween to prove I am connecting to the other side I invite them to take part.
Heck they can choose some target objects or words.
Best Wishes,
Jim
Last edited:
not daSkeptic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,913
He's not running. You are, and you know it. If you can really do what you claim, then skeptics and critics shouldn't bother you. You should be able to shove the evidence in their face. So get off your ass and do it already.
Jim Callahan
Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 249
That is what I am doing now.
Thanks for your post.
Jim
Thanks for your post.
Jim
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
Oh boy, not another one who talks and talks and never applies? Birds of a feather, eh?
not daSkeptic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,913
Sorry, don't buy it. You've been saying this for some time now, and thus far haven't produced anything except for a lot of meaningless words on a computer screen. If you're doing something, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
Bob Klase
Master Poster
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 2,937
I have to agree with Jim on this one. He is shoving the best evidence he has in the skeptic/critic's faces. The best evidence he can come up with is making claims on an internet forum. If that's not proof enough then I don't know what else he could do.
As you know Jim, you have to apply before we can discuss protocol. However, I did watch your performance on Phenomenon, and if you can do that under controlled conditions, you would win the million dollars. And it would be an easy and quick test.
So why not apply?
chran
Muse
What? And miss out on all the whining and stalling? Madness, I say!
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
Currency reproduction laws
The law 18 USC 504(2) permits reproduction of currency if it is authorized by the Treasury. The images at the MoneyFactory site, a site of the Department of the Treasury Bureau of Engraving and Printing, are approved by the Treasury for reproduction.
18 USC 474 makes it a crime to reproduce currency:
However, the next paragraph of the law goes on to specify that there are exceptions:
So we look to 18 USC 504 for the limits set by congress for what reproductions the Treasury may approve without specific authorization. (This section specifically specified that reproductions could be made “for philatelic, numismatic, educational, historical, or newsworthy purposes” until that phrase was deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court in Regan v. Time 1984, because courts can’t rule that something is newsworthy or educational). Section 504 says that reproductions must be larger (150%) or smaller (75%) that the actual currency. The regulations, 31 CFR 411, are not much different.
If you place a $20 on a photocopier and hit print, you may have committed a felony. I came across one case where a couple of college kids got busted for something like having some pot in their dorm room, and when the cops searched the room they found some pieces of paper with photocopies of bills. The kids had no idea it was illegal, but it was. I don’t know how the case turned out. I expect the charges were mostly used as a bargaining tool to get a plea on the drug charges and were dropped. Still, people have been charged with the crime of possessing a photocopy money.
So, is Randi going to the slammer? Unlikely. The laws concerning reproduction of currency are very short and strict. This allows the government a great deal of freedom to stop anything that may undermine the value of currency. But courts have even stated “some judgment is needed on the part of the officers charged with enforcing the counterfeiting statutes”. Boggs was never charged. Manufactures of prop money for movie studios that was a little too real and ended up in circulation were never charged. They had contraband seized and were ordered to stop production, but were not charged with a crime. I didn’t look too hard, but I could not readily find a conviction of anyone for photocopying money unless there was also intent to defraud (not that there couldn’t be-the Secret Service must ensure that confusing reproductions do not end up in circulation even if there was no intent on the creator to benefit from the counterfeits).
The Randi video does not seem suitable for prosecutions because 1) it is not clear if he has a copy of actual currency, 2) it is not clear if the copy violates the size requirements, 3) there was no attempt to defraud, 4) the copy was used for educational purposes, which historically and currently have been deemed legitimate uses of reproductions, 5) the copy was destroyed, 6) there is no potential that the (destroyed) copy would enter circulation or undermine or undervalue legitimate currency.
So I would expect the Secret Service to tell Callahan (if they reply at all), “Thank for bringing this video to our attention. And, no, you may not use exact-sized reproductions of currency in your act.” And that would be the end of that.
It is maybe not as far fetched as you think. I’m not a lawyer, but I do often work with laws.
The law 18 USC 504(2) permits reproduction of currency if it is authorized by the Treasury. The images at the MoneyFactory site, a site of the Department of the Treasury Bureau of Engraving and Printing, are approved by the Treasury for reproduction.
18 USC 474 makes it a crime to reproduce currency:
Unlike other laws against passing counterfeit money (uttering) or other reproductions, note that the above does not mention intent. Courts upheld that reproduction of currency is a crime regardless of intent in cases involving JSG Boggs, an artist that drew exact copies of bills and sold or bartered with them as works of art.
However, the next paragraph of the law goes on to specify that there are exceptions:
So, the Treasury can authorize reproductions, but also must establish regulations for creating reproductions for legitimate purposes.
So we look to 18 USC 504 for the limits set by congress for what reproductions the Treasury may approve without specific authorization. (This section specifically specified that reproductions could be made “for philatelic, numismatic, educational, historical, or newsworthy purposes” until that phrase was deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court in Regan v. Time 1984, because courts can’t rule that something is newsworthy or educational). Section 504 says that reproductions must be larger (150%) or smaller (75%) that the actual currency. The regulations, 31 CFR 411, are not much different.
If you place a $20 on a photocopier and hit print, you may have committed a felony. I came across one case where a couple of college kids got busted for something like having some pot in their dorm room, and when the cops searched the room they found some pieces of paper with photocopies of bills. The kids had no idea it was illegal, but it was. I don’t know how the case turned out. I expect the charges were mostly used as a bargaining tool to get a plea on the drug charges and were dropped. Still, people have been charged with the crime of possessing a photocopy money.
So, is Randi going to the slammer? Unlikely. The laws concerning reproduction of currency are very short and strict. This allows the government a great deal of freedom to stop anything that may undermine the value of currency. But courts have even stated “some judgment is needed on the part of the officers charged with enforcing the counterfeiting statutes”. Boggs was never charged. Manufactures of prop money for movie studios that was a little too real and ended up in circulation were never charged. They had contraband seized and were ordered to stop production, but were not charged with a crime. I didn’t look too hard, but I could not readily find a conviction of anyone for photocopying money unless there was also intent to defraud (not that there couldn’t be-the Secret Service must ensure that confusing reproductions do not end up in circulation even if there was no intent on the creator to benefit from the counterfeits).
The Randi video does not seem suitable for prosecutions because 1) it is not clear if he has a copy of actual currency, 2) it is not clear if the copy violates the size requirements, 3) there was no attempt to defraud, 4) the copy was used for educational purposes, which historically and currently have been deemed legitimate uses of reproductions, 5) the copy was destroyed, 6) there is no potential that the (destroyed) copy would enter circulation or undermine or undervalue legitimate currency.
So I would expect the Secret Service to tell Callahan (if they reply at all), “Thank for bringing this video to our attention. And, no, you may not use exact-sized reproductions of currency in your act.” And that would be the end of that.
Last edited:
not daSkeptic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,913
Great info.
Regardless of the outcome of this particular tangent, I think it's rather telling of Callahan to do this. It says to me that he cannot beat Randi on the merits of the main issue, so he has to distract everyone with something totally irrelevant. Seems to be quite the typical tactic for a charlatan.
- Status