B.C government= Mafia

[The Flying Dutchman]

Gambling has given our provincial government in British Cloumbia huge revenues. Casinos are popping up all over the place cutting into charities and their bingo operations. Yes, we've come a long way since the only big jackpot us Canadians could hope for was the Irish Sweepstakes.

But our government wants a cut and control of every conceivable gambling operation and their latest foray into my community is way over the top.

See, we have a small seniors organization called the Happy Wanderers. These people knit together and raise funds for their supplies. I'm not sure they could be classified as a charity, but they do knit caps for babies in Afghanistan.

Now our government has declared their annual raffle yeilding a couple of hundred dollars illegal. Needless to say, everone I'm talking to is shaking their head.

See Campbell River Mirror (http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/campbellrivermirror/news/14805551.html)

[FarmerChick]

It's been that way for years in Canada. I've been involved in sports, and every 50/50 draw or any other raffle we've had was illegal. we all knew that, so it was only word of mouth. You can't advertise in the paper and expect to get away with it. The only way around that is to have a community group that is legal do the paperwork for you. See if you can get the Lions Club or Kinsmen involved.

[Annie]

It's been that way for years in Canada. I've been involved in sports, and every 50/50 draw or any other raffle we've had was illegal. we all knew that,

Really? So the provincial court judge* who sold me a meat draw ticket at the pub once upon a time was doing something naughty?! To the stocks!!!



*oh, like I remember his name now...... ;)

[Waenara]

I work for a non-profit community sports club, and we always get licenses when we hold 50/50s and raffles. It's not very expensive, and you wouldn't want to jeopardize your non-profit status by getting in legal trouble.

From the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission website (http://www.aglc.gov.ab.ca/licencingeligibility/default.asp):The Criminal Code (Canada) requires that groups participating in charitable gaming must be charitable or religious in nature and that the proceeds from charitable gaming be directed to charitable or religious purposes.

[Santo Rugger]

BYAHH!!!

Oh, my bad. I thought this was a sign up thread.

[Savannah]

That's just stupid. I'm not particularly crazy about how much government-sponsored gambling is already going on in this province, but honestly, back off. A freakin' quilt raffle? Does the government not have other more pressing issues to enforce? I can only think of about a hundred.

[Ike Witt]

From the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission website (http://www.aglc.gov.ab.ca/licencingeligibility/default.asp):
After reading that is seems like raising money to buy suicide vests for underprivliged jihadis is kosher.

[Annie]

Or halal. ;)

[FarmerChick]

My favorite draws were always for the big motherfuxtoring Texas Mickey. I would buy those tickets by the dozen.

A quilt? Notsomuch.

[Northern Piper]

Well, to start with, it's not the province of B.C. that has made the policy decision here, it's the federal Parliament. The Criminal Code (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga:l_VI::bo-ga:l_VII//en?page=5&isPrinting=false#codese:206) makes it an offence to conduct a lottery:Offence in relation to lotteries and games of chance

206. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years who

(a) makes, prints, advertises or publishes, or causes or procures to be made, printed, advertised or published, any proposal, scheme or plan for advancing, lending, giving, selling or in any way disposing of any property by lots, cards, tickets or any mode of chance whatever;

(b) sells, barters, exchanges or otherwise disposes of, or causes or procures, or aids or assists in, the sale, barter, exchange or other disposal of, or offers for sale, barter or exchange, any lot, card, ticket or other means or device for advancing, lending, giving, selling or otherwise disposing of any property by lots, tickets or any mode of chance whatever;

At the same time, Parliament has recognised that local community groups use lotteries to raise money for charitable purposes, and has provided a specific exemption (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga:l_VI::bo-ga:l_VII//en?page=5&isPrinting=false#codese:207) for them:Permitted lotteries

207. (1) Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Part relating to gaming and betting, it is lawful
...
(b) for a charitable or religious organization, pursuant to a licence issued by the Lieutenant Governor in Council of a province or by such other person or authority in the province as may be specified by the Lieutenant Governor in Council thereof, to conduct and manage a lottery scheme in that province if the proceeds from the lottery scheme are used for a charitable or religious object or purpose;

This isn't anything new. These provisions have been in the Criminal Code for years. Any group that runs a lottery without a licence is in breach of the law.

As for why the Province has raised the issue, well, it's the law. The provinces are required to enforce the Criminal Code. If a community group wants to raise money by a lottery, it has to comply with the law.

[Barbarian]

Of all the criminal things B.C. legislators have been involved in over the past few decades, this rant scores a minus 15 on the worthwhility scale.

[Muffin]

What's the big deal? Requiring a raffle permit hardly makes the government the Mafia.

[FarmerChick]

I guess the flying dutchman doesn't like our replies. He seems to have bailed on his lame pitting.

[Cervaise]

Needless to say, everone I'm talking to is shaking their head.Everyone who reads your threads also shakes their heads.

[The Flying Dutchman]

What's the big deal? Requiring a raffle permit hardly makes the government the Mafia.

We are talking about a very small bunch of fixed income old ladies who like to knit together. Their annual raffle yields a couple of hundred dollars so they can purchase supplies.

It isn't just a raffle permit which costs $28.00(small change hey Mr. Lawyer). You can't even buy a permit unless you are a registered charity which requires even more money and maybe a lawyer or accountant to negotiate the hoops and then you're forever accountable to the government.

[The Flying Dutchman]

I guess the flying dutchman doesn't like our replies. He seems to have bailed on his lame pitting.

If this pit is so lame why have you posted and then posted again ?

[Muffin]

It isn't just a raffle permit which costs $28.00(small change hey Mr. Lawyer).No, that is not true. ( http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/gaming/licences/classD.htm#two) Such a permit is only $10.00.


You can't even buy a permit unless you are a registered charity which requires even more money and maybe a lawyer or accountant to negotiate the hoops and then you're forever accountable to the government.No, that is not true. (http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/gaming/licences/classD.htm#two) Any group of three people can apply for such a permit. The group does not have to be registered as a not-for-profit society, or as a charity, or as a corporation. There is neither a requirement for, nor a need for, a lawyer or an accountant, for there are no hoops -- just a simple on-line application and a $10 fee. Hardly the stuff of Mafia.


B.C government= MafiaNo, that is not true. As Northern Piper has already pointed out to you, the criminality of unregulated gambling was set by the Canadian government, not the British Columbia government.


The Flying Dutchman, why did you make these things up rather than base your rant on actual facts? Why did you not not bother to check the procedure for small raffles before spewing your little balls of deficate derision at your bewildered adversaries?

[Muffin]

If this pit is so lame why have you posted and then posted again ?Just fighting ignorance, but with you it is taking longer than we thought.

[Cervaise]

"Sometimes, ignorance fights back."

[The Flying Dutchman]

No, that is not true. ( http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/gaming/licences/classD.htm#two) Such a permit is only $10.00.

From Lotteries Gaming and Betting (Raffles and Bingo Permits) (Amendment) Regulations 1996 S.R. No. 117/1996 (http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:nDUK0So1-hYJ:www.dms.dpc.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/0/4204205326F29EECCA256E5B0021A33A/%24FILE/96-117sr.pdf+raffle+permit+british+columbia&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ca)

4. Fee for an application for the issue of a consent to conduct a raffle After regulation 14 of the Lotteries Gaming and Betting (Raffles and Bingo Permits) Regulations 1992 insert— "15. Consent fee For the purposes of section 6(1AA)(e) of the Act, the prescribed fee is $28.00."


No, that is not true. (http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/gaming/licences/classD.htm#two) Any group of three people can apply for such a permit.
If you go back to my local newspaper link,
Other community groups hoping to fundraise with raffles and 50/50 draws, beware – only registered charities are allowed to hold such events.




The group does not have to be registered as a not-for-profit society, or as a charity, or as a corporation.

I repeat my previous statement.




There is neither a requirement for, nor a need for, a lawyer or an accountant, for there are no hoops -- just a simple on-line application and a $10 fee. Hardly the stuff of Mafia.

Application (http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t2050/t2050-01e.pdf)

Simple? I have a business and do my own bookwork and income tax, but I wouldn't want to wade through this bullshit. You expect little old ladies to be computer savvy? The reaction of these women bears this out. They won't be doing raffles any more





No, that is not true. As Northern Piper has already pointed out to you, the criminality of unregulated gambling was set by the Canadian government, not the British Columbia government.

I'm not concerned about criminality. Besides, sometimes the law is an ass. i'm ranting on the enforcement by the province. You know damn well, there is discretion in law enforcement In a lot of cases the cops require a complaint from the public before they'll act. In this case we are paying for people to shut down little old ladies who like to knit.

The Flying Dutchman, why did you make these things up rather than base your rant on actual facts?

Lookl, I just pointed out two clear errors on your part plus a lack of judgement on the hoops you have to go through to get registered. I backed this up. Don't go fucking telling me I made this up. Perhaps part of your problem iis that you're out of your jurisdiction.

Why did you not not bother to check the procedure for small raffles before spewing your little balls of deficate derision at your bewildered adversaries?

Back at ya

[The Flying Dutchman]

Muffin, I just reviewed your link which I didn't think neccessary at first given the information I presented was researched , fresh in my mind and I knew where to retrieve it.

It appears that you have more specific, recent and better information than I and my local paper have.

[The Flying Dutchman]

I just submitted your link to the local paper for a correction.

[Muffin]

Muffin, I just reviewed your link which I didn't think neccessary at first given the information I presented was researched , fresh in my mind and I knew where to retrieve it.

It appears that you have more specific, recent and better information than I and my local paper have.Pity you didn't bother reviewing the link prior to making a lengthy and again innaccurate response to the link.

[FarmerChick]

Muffin, I just reviewed your link which I didn't think neccessary at first given the information I presented was researched , fresh in my mind and I knew where to retrieve it.
It appears that you have more specific, recent and better information than I and my local paper have.

WTH, the story is posted in the paper January 30th, and you started the tread 3 days ago, did the damn government change the rules in a week?

Wow, the BC government is fast with changes!

[The Flying Dutchman]

The Flying Dutchman[/B], why did you make these things up rather than base your rant on actual facts? Why did you not not bother to check the procedure for small raffles before spewing your little balls of deficate derision at your bewildered adversaries?

Pity you didn't take that back. Btw, I didn't respond to your link, because I didn't read it., just like you didn't read my link. But trust a lawyer to twist the facts to suit his agenda. Pretty inept in this case.

[The Flying Dutchman]

WTH, the story is posted in the paper January 30th, and you started the tread 3 days ago, did the damn government change the rules in a week?

Wow, the BC government is fast with changes!

Please do try to read with comprehension. My problem started with an innacurate statement on the front page of my local paper. It has nothing to do with rule changes or my making things up.

[Muffin]

Don't go fucking telling me I made this up.You can fuckity fuck fuck at me as much as you like, but the fact remains that you did make it up. You held out federal law as being provincial law, you held out law that was repealed years ago as being current law, and you threw in false requirements about charitable status without any reference to legislation what so ever.


I didn't respond to your link, because I didn't read it.Plugging your fingers in your ears and crying "I can't hear you!" is no excuse. Here's a hint. When someone you know to be a Canadian lawyer directs you to a link on BC law, you should read the link.


just like you didn't read my link.
Of course I read your link. It was crap. You never should have posted it.


But trust a lawyer to twist the facts to suit his agenda. Pretty inept in this case.
Setting out the applicable law is hardly twisting the facts, and certainly is not inept.


Perhaps part of your problem iis that you're out of your jurisdiction.Again, you're talking out your ass. BC is not out of my jurisdiction (http://www.flsc.ca/en/pdf/mobility_agreement_aug02.pdf), I am the lawyer for a Canadian charity and some not-for-profits, and my unincorporated group of little old ladies here in ON holds regular raffles.

The problem lies with you flying off the handle without bothering to check your facts. You flew off the handle and ranted against the BC government without first doing a simple check to see what the deal was. When corrected on this by me, you then flew off the handle and started cursing away without first doing a simple check to read the link I provided for you. Now you are calling me inept. It's time for you to calm down and try to think rationally, rather than continue to make things up and lash out at those who actually know what they are talking about.

It's nice that now you are going to correct the newspaper (which I note ran its article without providing the government reasonable time in which to return its call), but it would be far nicer if you would simply do your homework rather than disseminate false information, and swear at and insult people who call you on it.

In short, either start acting more responsibly, or expect to continue be taken as a fool.

[FarmerChick]

Please do try to read with comprehension. My problem started with an innacurate statement on the front page of my local paper. It has nothing to do with rule changes or my making things up.

I can read and comprehend just fine, you said you researched it, not me. Now you are saying you got from the newspaper. Make up your damn mind.

Muffin, I just reviewed your link which I didn't think neccessary at first given the information I presented was researched , fresh in my mind and I knew where to retrieve it.

It appears that you have more specific, recent and better information than I and my local paper have.

[Muffin]

I can read and comprehend just fine, you said you researched it, not me. Now you are saying you got from the newspaper. Make up your damn mind.And when called on his lack of research, he then cited a regulation from another country on the other side of the world -- trying to pass off a regulation in the State of Victoria in Austrialia as if it were a regulation in the Province of British Columbia in Canada. From Lotteries Gaming and Betting (Raffles and Bingo Permits) (Amendment) Regulations 1996 S.R. No. 117/1996 (http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:nDUK0So1-hYJ:www.dms.dpc.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/0/4204205326F29EECCA256E5B0021A33A/%24FILE/96-117sr.pdf+raffle+permit+british+columbia&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ca)

[The Flying Dutchman]

And when called on his lack of research, he then cited a regulation from another country on the other side of the world -- trying to pass off a regulation in the State of Victoria in Austrialia as if it were a regulation in the Province of British Columbia in Canada.

Sigh

You win. I didn't do that on purpose though.

[Northern Piper]

I'm not concerned about criminality. Besides, sometimes the law is an ass. i'm ranting on the enforcement by the province. You know damn well, there is discretion in law enforcement In a lot of cases the cops require a complaint from the public before they'll act. In this case we are paying for people to shut down little old ladies who like to knit.Sure, there's discretion in law enforcement - but that discretion doesn't mean that law enforcement can just decide not to enforce the law. The discretion is to allow the law enforcement to look at the circumstances and decide if the situation is serious enough to warrant charges, or whether they should just advise that the conduct is illegal and give a warning.

That's exactly what happened here, according to the article you cited. It looks like the gaming authorities got in touch with the knitting circle and warned them that an unlicensed lottery is a criminal offence. The knitting ladies, being good citizens, appear to be concerned about staying on the right side of the law, and withdrew the lottery. That strikes me as a good exercise of law enforcement discretion, and a sensible action in response by the knitters. (And, how do you know that there weren't any complaints, after the knitters published their lottery advert? Seems to me that you're just making an assumption there - we don't know from the article whether or not there was a complaint.)