| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
forthepeoplebythepeople
Forum Admin
95 Posts |
 Posted - 01/30/2007 : 08:43:50
|
`Sec. 5362. Definitions
`In this subchapter:
`(1) BET OR WAGER- The term `bet or wager'--
`(A) means the staking or risking by any person of something of value upon the outcome of a contest of others, a sporting event, or a game subject to chance, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or another person will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome;
First, just allow me to say that the word OF between person and something just really annoys me. I mean, REALLY annoys me. It is not a proper wording formatting, now or ever in any English language that I can see. And in my opinion it makes no sense. That "OF" should be stricken now.
Who ever wrote this whole paragraph wrote it with little or no common sense.
To bet or wager means simply to put up something of some sort of value against a possible chance of winning your something back plus a little something else.
It could be money - it could be chores for the day... It could be your car - your house - whatever... It's just something that someone else values. Period.
Unnecessary legal blah blah blah for no reason other than to tell people that they must be stupid. And let me tell you folks. Stupid we are not.
How hard would it be to get Congress or the US Government to just "plain talk" as if all of this lingo they are using is any better than ebonics.
`(B) includes the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery or other prize (which opportunity to win is predominantly subject to chance);
Uhm - so I guess you can't buy lottery tickets online now... No Scratchers.... or pay for any sweepstakes entry online ---- no pools betting...
`(C) includes any scheme of a type described in section 3702 of title 28;
To be blatantly honest - I have absolutely no idea what section 3702 title 28 is...
So I can't comment here yet but give me a few moments searching the web...
Uhmmm
Ah yess... Here it is... How very interesting... I'll paste it for you:
28 USC Sec. 3702 01/03/05
-EXPCITE-
TITLE 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
PART VI - PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS
CHAPTER 178 - PROFESSIONAL AND AMATEUR SPORTS PROTECTION
-HEAD-
Sec. 3702. Unlawful sports gambling
-STATUTE-
It shall be unlawful for -
(1) a governmental entity to sponsor, operate, advertise,
promote, license, or authorize by law or compact, or
(2) a person to sponsor, operate, advertise, or promote,
pursuant to the law or compact of a governmental entity,
a lottery, sweepstakes, or other betting, gambling, or wagering
scheme based, directly or indirectly (through the use of
geographical references or otherwise), on one or more competitive
games in which amateur or professional athletes participate, or are
intended to participate, or on one or more performances of such
athletes in such games.
-SOURCE-
(Added Pub. L. 102-559, Sec. 2(a), Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4228.)
-End-
I hate to say this - but this pretty much means no betting on sports... LOL! Yeah - uhmmmmm Vegas did you notice this law?
No. Actually I kind of think this means - NO BOOKIES.
And no government agencies may offer bookie services.
And here is who it applies to:
Section 3704. Applicability
(a) Section 3702 shall not apply to -
(1) a lottery, sweepstakes, or other betting, gambling, or
wagering scheme in operation in a State or other governmental
entity, to the extent that the scheme was conducted by that State
or other governmental entity at any time during the period
beginning January 1, 1976, and ending August 31, 1990;
(2) a lottery, sweepstakes, or other betting, gambling, or
wagering scheme in operation in a State or other governmental
entity where both -
(A) such scheme was authorized by a statute as in effect on
October 2, 1991; and
(B) a scheme described in section 3702 (other than one based
on parimutuel animal racing or jai-alai games) actually was
conducted in that State or other governmental entity at any
time during the period beginning September 1, 1989, and ending
October 2, 1991, pursuant to the law of that State or other
governmental entity;
(3) a betting, gambling, or wagering scheme, other than a
lottery described in paragraph (1), conducted exclusively in
casinos located in a municipality, but only to the extent that -
(A) such scheme or a similar scheme was authorized, not later
than one year after the effective date of this chapter, to be
operated in that municipality; and
(B) any commercial casino gaming scheme was in operation in
such municipality throughout the 10-year period ending on such
effective date pursuant to a comprehensive system of State
regulation authorized by that State's constitution and
applicable solely to such municipality; or
(4) parimutuel animal racing or jai-alai games.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (a), section 3702 shall
apply on lands described in section 4(4) of the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2703(4)).
What me thinks is that Gee - Las Vegas saw this coming - and since they were "ALREADY" Operating prior to the USC (United States Code) they could care less - since it didn't apply to them.
Hmmmm.... this gets deeper and deeper....
Yanno - I'm begining to wonder how much Las Vegas might be behind this online law....
Ahhh shoot - don't listen to me - Think for yourselves. One thing that is important is that we all learn.
That we tell our politicians - what WE - as a group of people they are supposed to represent... What we... WANT...
Not what THEY want for US.
Catching on yet?
OK - back to the definitions.
`(D) includes any instructions or information pertaining to the establishment or movement of funds by the bettor or customer in, to, or from an account with the business of betting or wagering; and
Uhmmm here we go again... blahbbitty blahbitty blah blah.
This means basically - TRANSFERRING FUNDS.
Uh duh... Whether by instruction... Yanno - "pssst. Hey at 4 pm be on the corner of West and Main and pick up the paper bag. Cause I want to place a bet on slot machines at your business."
`(E) does not include--
`(i) any activity governed by the securities laws (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(47) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the purchase or sale of securities (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(10) of that Act);
WHAT?
WHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT???????
WTF???
Didn't we just note that the Securitites Commission - belongs to the US Government?
Oh... I get it - it's OK to do Day Trading - becuase... Uhmm... Because the Govt. owns it.
Yeah... Uh.. Gotcha.
`(ii) any transaction conducted on or subject to the rules of a registered entity or exempt board of trade under the Commodity Exchange Act;
Oh yeah - Government Commodoties. Hmmm would those be owned by the Government? Trading is ok - but no... don't touch that slot machine button or pick up those cards online... Nuh uh... No freaking way.
`(iii) any over-the-counter derivative instrument;
OK - someone fill me in on what an OVER THE COUNTER DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENT IS.
Puhlease...
Cause yanno - I'm thinking slot machines - on counters at pharmacies that sell condoms and vaseline.
`(iv) any other transaction that--
`(I) is excluded or exempt from regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act; or
Here we go again. If the Government has any hand in it - 10-1 I'll bet that it's "exempted" or legal.
Sigh - maybe online casinos should get casino.gov addresses.
`
(II) is exempt from State gaming or bucket shop laws under section 12(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act or section 28(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
Govt. again...
But what the heck is bucket shop laws.
Anyone?
`(v) any contract of indemnity or guarantee;
`(vi) any contract for insurance;
Now here is something I find interesting.
Some people actually believe insurance is a "wagering" thing.
I am not sure how they figured this out - but they think that you are paying because you are "betting" that you will not wreck - but if you do.... And so on.
I'm not one to believe that - but I have heard people say that insurance is a scam.
`(vii) any deposit or other transaction with an insured depository institution;
Well duh... we want banks from being exempted from getting into trouble for taking money... Because if they have FDIC - but don't take money and they go broke --- The FDIC doesn't want to pay the money... Uhm... we're the people who wrote this people who forgot to get their GEDs?
But - this of course goes back to the theory that Insurance is a scam... and of course that would mean - if insurance "WAS" a scam... that would mean the FDIC is one of the biggest Scam companies EVER.
Hmmm... Let's not go there... Conspiracy theories are fun. But I don't really want to get shot today.
`(viii) participation in any game or contest in which participants do not stake or risk anything of value other than--
`(I) personal efforts of the participants in playing the game or contest or obtaining access to the Internet; or
`(II) points or credits that the sponsor of the game or contest provides to participants free of charge and that can be used or redeemed only for participation in games or contests offered by the sponsor; or
So this leaves gaming sites like POGO or others open... Online.
That's cool to me - but hey... Don't they CHARGE for upgrade ACCESS?
Now shouldn't payment for membership to a site be illegal?
Hmmmm... wait.... Maybe Casinos online can start charging a rotating monthly fees, determined on usage of the site - and credit back to the consumer for participation points... We just won't all it gambling... We'll call it POGO EXTRAORDINAIRE BON CASINO.
Just kidding - exemptions keep going on below...
Continue on:
`(ix) participation in any fantasy or simulation sports game or educational game or contest in which (if the game or contest involves a team or teams) no fantasy or simulation sports team is based on the current membership of an actual team that is a member of an amateur or professional sports organization (as those terms are defined in section 3701 of title 28) and that meets the following conditions:
Here we go again - that USC... Hmmmm something tells me - that no one knew much about the USC 3701 - 3704.
So you can participate in fantasy sports or simulated sports as long as it doesn't have current members of a team.
`(I) All prizes and awards offered to winning participants are established and made known to the participants in advance of the game or contest and their value is not determined by the number of participants or the amount of any fees paid by those participants.
`(II) All winning outcomes reflect the relative knowledge and skill of the participants and are determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of the performance of individuals (athletes in the case of sports events) in multiple real-world sporting or other events.
`(III) No winning outcome is based--
`(aa) on the score, point-spread, or any performance or performances of any single real-world team or any combination of such teams; or
`(bb) solely on any single performance of an individual athlete in any single real-world sporting or other event.
Hmmmmm. That pretty much covers what gambling is...
At least for sports - sporting events, etc.
So this part is almost exclusively for sportsbooks.
`(2) BUSINESS OF BETTING OR WAGERING- The term `business of betting or wagering' does not include the activities of a financial transaction provider, or any interactive computer service or telecommunications service.
Pretty straight forward here - -- BUT... Why, if this is true - why is Neteller in trouble right now?
I suppose the one thing I can say to Neteller is: SHRED LIKE ENRON!!!
`(3) DESIGNATED PAYMENT SYSTEM- The term `designated payment system' means any system utilized by a financial transaction provider that the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, jointly determine, by regulation or order, could be utilized in connection with, or to facilitate, any restricted transaction.
Well now - hmmm... what exactly IS restricted tansactions?
And why is it all GOVERNMENT AGENCIES that DETERMINE what is Restricted?
Neteller - did you hear me? SHRED DUDES... Bon Fire...
`(4) FINANCIAL TRANSACTION PROVIDER- The term `financial transaction provider' means a creditor, credit card issuer, financial institution, operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated, money transmitting business, or international, national, regional, or local payment network utilized to effect a credit transaction, electronic fund transfer, stored value product transaction, or money transmitting service, or a participant in such network, or other participant in a designated payment system.
Straightforward English.
WOW - ok... Here's where I COMPLETELY Disagree with the UNITED STATES Commission...
WHERE DO THEY GET OFF telling INTERNATIONAL companies how to conduct business?
`(5) INTERNET- The term `Internet' means the international computer network of interoperable packet switched data networks.
OK - this is where the definitions start scaring me. The US is planning a monopolization of the FREE WORLD WIDE WEB.
Don't believe it - go read it for yourself again...
The Internet is INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER NETWORK OF INTEROPERABLE PACKET SWITCHED DATA NETWORKS.
What is this law?
It is the "UNLAWFUL - INTERNET - GAMBLING LAW"
Hmmmmm... Yeah... OK - not only do they define the internet in this definition - they tell you in the LAW Body - that they (sic. the US) has the RIGHT to CONTROL it.
No.
This is NOT ok with me.
How about you?
`(6) INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE- The term `interactive computer service' has the meaning given the term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)).
I don't even want to go look this one up.
Every time I look something up - I get more and more depressed at what I am finding. I find laws that make no sense. Laws that show how much actual CONTROL the government has stolen - without telling us.
Oh well - get your coffee... This is going to be scary... It's getting pretty scary to me... How about you?
89
SEC. 230. [47 U.S.C. 230] PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE BLOCKING
AND SCREENING OF OFFENSIVE MATERIAL.
(a) FINDINGS.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) The rapidly developing array of Internet and other interactive
computer services available to individual Americans represent an
extraordinary advance in the availability of educational and informational
resources to our citizens.
(2) These services offer users a great degree of control over the
information that they receive, as well as the potential for even greater
control in the future as technology develops.
(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a
forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for
cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.
(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services have
flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government
regulation.
(5) Increasingly Americans are relying on interactive media for a
variety of political, educational, cultural, and entertainment services.
(b) POLICY.--It is the policy of the United States--
(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other
interactive computer services and other interactive media;
(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that
presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services,
unfettered by Federal or State regulation;
(3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize
user control over what information is received by individuals, families, and
schools who use the Internet and other interactive computer services;
(4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of
blocking and filtering technologies that empower parents to restrict their
children's access to objectionable or inappropriate online material; and
(5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to
deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by
means of computer.
(c) PROTECTION FOR ''GOOD SAMARITAN'' BLOCKING AND SCREENING OF
OFFENSIVE MATERIAL.--
(1) TREATMENT OF PUBLISHER OR SPEAKER.--No provider or user
of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or
speaker of any information provided by another information content
provider.
(2) CIVIL LIABILITY.--No provider or user of an interactive
computer service shall be held liable on account of--
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict
Communications Act of 1934
90
access to or availability of material that the provider or user
considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent,
harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material
is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to
information content providers or others the technical means to
restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).
(d) EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.--
(1) NO EFFECT ON CRIMINAL LAW.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 of this Act, chapter 71
(relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of
title 18, United States Code, or any other Federal criminal statute.
(2) NO EFFECT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW.--Nothing in this
section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to
intellectual property.
(3) STATE LAW.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to
prevent any State from enforcing any State law that is consistent with this
section. No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed
under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.
(4) NO EFFECT ON COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY LAW.--Nothing in
this section shall be construed to limit the application of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act of 1986 or any of the amendments made by
such Act, or any similar State law.
(e) DEFINITIONS.--As used in this section:
(1) INTERNET.--The term ''Internet'' means the international
computer network of both Federal and non-Federal interoperable packet
switched data networks.
(2) INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE.--The term ''interactive
computer service'' means any information service, system, or access
software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple
users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that
provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services
offered by libraries or educational institutions.
(3) INFORMATION CONTENT PROVIDER.--The term ''information
content provider'' means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole
or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through
the Internet or any other interactive computer service.
(4) ACCESS SOFTWARE PROVIDER.--The term ''access software
provider'' means a provider of software (including client or server
software), or enabling tools that do any one or more of the following:
(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content;
(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or
Communications Act of 1934
(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search,
subset, organize, reorganize, or translate content.
Well Shoot - does that mean - as of the date of this USC that the US has had the RIGHT to BLOCK our transmissions?
Something tells me that without our even knowing it - the US has been stealthily implementing laws to choose how to program it's individuals.
Interesting to say the very least.
What are YOU getting out of this?
I digress... back to 4594.
`(7) RESTRICTED TRANSACTION- The term `restricted transaction' means any transaction or transmittal involving any credit, funds, instrument, or proceeds described in any paragraph of section 5363 which the recipient is prohibited from accepting under section 5363.
We haven't gotten to 5363 yet - but I can already tell that I'm not going to like 5363. Cause it's restricting a transaction - some how some way telling me - a US citizen, what I can, and cannot do in my own home.
`(8) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Treasury.
Well at least we know WHO NOT to send flowers to on Secretary's Day.
Sheesh - the Secretary of the Treasury.
Another Government entity. Sigh...
Hmmmmmmm...
`(9) STATE- The term `State' means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any commonwealth, territory, or other possession of the United States.
Well don't worry - Sounds like the US is going to try for World Wide OWNERSHIP pretty soon.
`
(10) UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING-
`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `unlawful Internet gambling' means to place, receive, or otherwise knowingly transmit a bet or wager by any means which involves the use, at least in part, of the Internet where such bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable Federal or State law in the State or Tribal lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
Well I suppose that this means that Internet gambling is illegal. Now... and always has been.
At the rate that I am learning things (from all the research) without the general public knowing it - according to a lot of documents - the US made online gambling illegal.
And here - which is absurd - is another monumental thing I disagree with.
My Country - cannot - simply cannot tell another country that what they put online is illegal. That violates other laws... Whih I don't even want to try and attack in this singular post. But think along FREE TRADE LAWS. How can one country believe they have the right to dictate what another country does? I mean one state cannot dictate what another state does. Sorry folks - that is just not permitted.
`(B) INTRASTATE TRANSACTIONS- The term `unlawful Internet gambling' does not include placing, receiving, or otherwise transmitting a bet or wager where--
`(i) the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made exclusively within a single State;
Wait - does not include single state online gambling?
Intrastate gambling?
Wait --- does that mean - I can build a casino for online gamblers in the state I'm in... Provided my state allows casinos ---- and accept wagers from the people who reside in my state?
Sheesh - which state has the most gamblers? Sign me the hell up!
OK - well - yeah - uhm... looks like Tribal Casinos will be allowed to make online bets ---- this definition CERTAINLY covers the asses of: Lotteries, Horse Races, Bingo Parlors and Pull Tab places.
`(ii) the bet or wager and the method by which the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made is expressly authorized by and placed in accordance with the laws of such State, and the State law or regulations include--
Oh - of course --- like I said --- as long as the State says it is ok.
`(I) age and location verification requirements reasonably designed to block access to minors and persons located out of such State; and
Ha ha ha - even the Government admits how hard it is to prove that little Johnny isn't gambling on his Daddy's credit card.
No - but seriously - say you go down once to the Tribal Casino - and show them your id - and then you can gamble online... From your own state.
Hmmm This whole thing Stinks to HIGH Heaven of Las Vegas manipulation.
`(II) appropriate data security standards to prevent unauthorized access by any person whose age and current location has not been verified in accordance with such State's law or regulations; and
Well duh ---- setting it up already - as long as the database is secure. But seriously folks - we all know there is a 10 year old Russian Hacker who can get into it.
`(iii) the bet or wager does not violate any provision of--
`(I) the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
Can we say: How much money did Frist get from the Horse Racing Mafia -oohhh wait --- I mean commission?
`(II) chapter 178 of title 28 (commonly known as the `Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act');
Geee... Las Vegas doesn't host fights - does it?
`(III) the Gambling Devices Transportation Act (15 U.S.C. 1171 et seq.); or
I'm not looking this one up tonight... Nope - won't even hazard a guess on it.
`(IV) the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
`(C) INTRATRIBAL TRANSACTIONS- The term `unlawful Internet gambling' does not include placing, receiving, or otherwise transmitting a bet or wager where--
`(i) the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made exclusively--
`(I) within the Indian lands of a single Indian tribe (as such terms are defined under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act); or
`(II) between the Indian lands of 2 or more Indian tribes to the extent that intertribal gaming is authorized by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act;
`(ii) the bet or wager and the method by which the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made is expressly authorized by and complies with the requirements of--
`(I) the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution approved by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission; and
`(II) with respect to class III gaming, the applicable Tribal-State Compact;
`(iii) the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution or Tribal-State Compact includes--
`(I) age and location verification requirements reasonably designed to block access to minors and persons located out of the applicable Tribal lands; and
`(II) appropriate data security standards to prevent unauthorized access by any person whose age and current location has not been verified in accordance with the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution or Tribal-State Compact; and
`(iv) the bet or wager does not violate any provision of--
`(I) the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
`(II) chapter 178 of title 28 (commonly known as the `Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act');
`(III) the Gambling Devices Transportation Act (15 U.S.C. 1171 et seq.); or
`(IV) the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
`(D) INTERSTATE HORSERACING-
`(i) IN GENERAL- The term `unlawful Internet gambling' shall not include any activity that is allowed under the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.).
Can we say... Tribal Government CASINOS?
Can we say Frist is probably sitting down with a nice little lining in his pocket from the Tribal Governments - and the Horse Racing Commissions?
`(ii) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION REGARDING PREEMPTION- Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to preempt any State law prohibiting gambling.
So basically - if it's illegal in your state now - it's illegal.
`(iii) SENSE OF CONGRESS- It is the sense of Congress that this subchapter shall not change which activities related to horse racing may or may not be allowed under Federal law. This subparagraph is intended to address concerns that this subchapter could have the effect of changing the existing relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes in effect on the date of the enactment of this subchapter. This subchapter is not intended to change that relationship. This subchapter is not intended to resolve any existing disagreements over how to interpret the relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes.
Oh yeah --- Did I mention Frist has a lot of money? Now... After the lobbyists for Horse Racing talked to him over tea, of course...
Let's really cover our assess says the Government - we double promise that Horse Racing will be ok - Mr. President.
Cause we all KNOW - that betting on horses isn't really gambling... Right, Mr. High and Moral Frist.
`(E) INTERMEDIATE ROUTING- The intermediate routing of electronic data shall not determine the location or locations in which a bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
[/orange]
OK- basically - if there is a crossover (node spot) that node spot doesn't mean that the node itself is making the transmit of the bet.
Nope - it means - YEP YOU GUESSED it - they can route ALL the way back to you.
`(11) OTHER TERMS-
`(A) CREDIT; CREDITOR; CREDIT CARD; AND CARD ISSUER- The terms `credit', `creditor', `credit card', and `card issuer' have the meanings given the terms in section 103 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1602).
`(B) ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFER- The term `electronic fund transfer'--
`(i) has the meaning given the term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. 1693a), except that the term includes transfers that would otherwise be excluded under section 903(6)(E) of that Act; and
`(ii) includes any fund transfer covered by Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, as in effect in any State.
`(C) FINANCIAL INSTITUTION- The term `financial institution' has the meaning given the term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, except that such term does not include a casino, sports book, or other business at or through which bets or wagers may be placed or received.
`(D) INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION- The term `insured depository institution'--
`(i) has the meaning given the term in section 3(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(c)); and
`(ii) includes an insured credit union (as defined in section 101 of the Federal Credit Union Act).
`(E) MONEY TRANSMITTING BUSINESS AND MONEY TRANSMITTING SERVICE- The terms `money transmitting business' and `money transmitting service' have the meanings given the terms in section 5330(d) (determined without regard to any regulations prescribed by the Secretary thereunder).[/orange]
Well just read that up there... Hmmm.....
The Government appears to have been planning this takeover for quite some time.
And these are just the clarifications...
The tip of the icebergs...
And yeah ---
You should be afraid...
Cause look at who is controlling the government right now.
Look who has been made exempt...
Now go research who was paid what by whom...
And see who got paid - and what they bet.
Think substantial...
Think maybe 2 million a vote....
Or more.
I don't know if anyone was bought ---- but let that conspiracy theory roll around in your mind.
OK - I'll do more of a FTPBTP shakedown tomorrow....
I'm a sick puppy still (physically - not emotionally...) So bear with me as I recover.
FTPBTP
|
I believe in the strength of the people.
We choose who is in office and what they deliver to us.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
America - WAKE UP! |
|
|
leemarie85
Administrator Assistant
USA
26 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2007 : 23:49:51
|
| I have EXCEDRIN HEADACHE #4954!!! What did they write, here, the King James Version of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Law??? Good Grief, I started glazing over during the FRIST, I mean FIRST paragraph! |
"Apathy is a dangerous thing..." |
 |
|
|
forthepeoplebythepeople
Forum Admin
95 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 04:29:17
|
ROFLMAO _ no shit - But to be very honest - YOU HAVE TO READ it - so you know what you're up against.
Kinda sad what is really there... Not just this new law - but all the laws that have been passed without ANYONE knowing about it.
|
I believe in the strength of the people.
We choose who is in office and what they deliver to us.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
America - WAKE UP! |
|
|
|
leemarie85
Administrator Assistant
USA
26 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 14:27:20
|
Yes, I feel as though I've "woken up" too late . I never realized how important it is to keep up on all of the legislation. The politicians we elected to protect us just collect the money and remain silent. Where are the watchdogs?? We need to become our own watchdogs, find the information BEFORE it's passed into law. |
"Apathy is a dangerous thing..." |
|
|
|
forthepeoplebythepeople
Forum Admin
95 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 03:12:47
|
Your tag line says it all. Sadly - huh?
It's ok - it's not too late to change America - back to what we WANT it to be.
To be what it is supposed to be.
But that only means that we need to stand up - and work for our belief!
|
I believe in the strength of the people.
We choose who is in office and what they deliver to us.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
America - WAKE UP! |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
SUBCHAPTER IV - SECTION 5362 - Definitions
