Safety deposit boxes

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Wilmot of Rochester

Policies for cash would also include the policy of not accepting cash or of accepting foreign currencies.

And yet that makes no difference, given the legal tender laws of the US.

[Wilmot_of_Rochester]

@Knight_of_BAAWA

@Wilmot of Rochester

Policies for cash would also include the policy of not accepting cash or of accepting foreign currencies.

And yet that makes no difference, given the legal tender laws of the US.

Except it does make a difference. Read the law you cited.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

Except it doesn’t make a difference. We’re talking about what the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES AS LEGAL TENDER.

Get it now?

[Wilmot_of_Rochester]

Yeah, I get it because I read the law and understand what it means. You apparently don’t.

[nirgrahamUK]

what did you read?

[nirgrahamUK]

there are lots of fun laws to read. america ensures freedom for its citizens.

U.S. Code collection

• main page
• faq
• index
• search

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 25 > § 486
Prev | Next

§ 486. Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metalHow Current is This?

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title ^[1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

there are lots of lovelly laws. perhaps i can find a law for you ? place your requests and i’ll see what the US government can cook up.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Wilmot of Rochester

Yeah, I get it because I read the law and understand what it means.

O RLY? You clearly don’t grasp that the law talks about what the federal government says is legal tender. You’d rather create some diversion than have to deal with that.

[Wilmot_of_Rochester]

@Wilmot of Rochester

@JonBostwick

If anyone bothers to click the link, you’ll notice the FAQ is talking about what “legal tender” means. What the answer, which Wilmot quoted mid-paragraph, is saying that a debtor is obligated to take dollars in payment of a debt, but a business is not obligated to engage in a transaction with a dollar holder.

That’s actually not what it says,

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor.

What the law really states is that for all contracts not otherwise stated the assumed form of payment is legal dollars. If you wanted to charge 800 gummy bears for a pair of jeans and refused federal reserve notes as the equivalent, you’d be able to do so. I’m not entirely certain about debts, I think if you stated in the contract specifically what you would take, there would be a case for it, but that may be a legal case matter that I’m not familiar with.

Here.

This is what I read.