Why is that?
If it’s describing a situation that exists only 30% of the time, it’s still realistic for that 30%. Where do you get the idea that it is constrained to follow the norm in order to be called “realistic?” Isn’t a realistic show one that describes a real situation, not necessarily a “better than 50%” situation?
I appreciate your willingness to guess. My own guess is “It’s not almost all.”
Does anyone have any actual GQ-like information on this question?
Umm, no. If you structure cash- even that from a 100% legal source- you can be in violation of Title 18 or 31 USC, and sections of the Patriot Act.
See “structuring” under T31 USC:
"No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section 5313 (a) or 5325 or any regulation prescribed under any such section, the reporting or record keeping requirements imposed by any order issued under section 5326, or the record keeping requirements imposed by any regulation prescribed under section 21 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act or section 123 of Public Law 91–508— […] (3) structure or assist in structuring, or attempt to structure or assist in structuring, any transaction with one or more domestic financial institutions."
In other words, even if the source of the cash is 100% legal, structuring said cash transactions (in order not to report them on a currency transaction report/CTR or similar form) is illegal. Now it’s true that most money laundering is done to conceal the illegal source of said funds. But for example, a attempt to conceal income (that is 100% legal) from the IRS, (in order not to pay taxes) by structuring said cash in small transactions- is a crime.
I’ll also point out that money laundering also concerns taking 100% legal funds, then structuring the cash in order to hide it’s end criminal use- such as terrorist financing.
http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/bsa/
Note that I am a Certified Anti-Money Specialist, with ACAMs certification.
Well, because then it conceals the real nasty truth, the truth of brainwashing, child-sex, incest, forced brides, human trafficking, and welfare fraud.
Real GQ info? You’re a lawyer, right? Bigamy is against the law, right? Most laws do have the purpose of protecting the public weal, right?
Why not call one of the DA’s involved in prosecuting one of those Polygamy sect cases? Talk to them lawyer to lawyer. See what they say. See if they say “Well, it’s really all right, no harm done, it’s just a technicality, no one is really harmed by these sort of things”. See what they say about the prevalence of incest, welfare fraud, child abuse and such. Then come back. Share it with us. Of course, we’re not expecting a press release or a quote from them, just what they say to you unofficially, then in your own words.
I have done so, myself. It’s worse than I have said here. But I’d like to see what your sources say.
So, if a man is separated from his wife (divorce hasn’t become final), and decides to move in with his new girlfriend, he is committing bigamy?
You might find this thread helpful: Does a common-law marriage ‘count’ twards a charge of bigamy?
Here are some previous threads that touched on this topic:
Plural marriage – what’s the crime?
How does U.S. law deal with polygamy in other countries?
Is Big Love-style polygyny actually illegal?
When is Polygamy NOT Polygamy?
Child brides aside, is a willingly polygamist lifestyle with adults illegal?
Your link goes to a thread about a “Reflex tester”.
Ooops. Ok. Let me see what I did there.
I fixed the link. I managed to cut off the last character of the URL when I copied and pasted.
Here is the correct link for those who don’t feel like scrolling up: Does a common-law marriage ‘count’ twards a charge of bigamy?
I find Big Love (or what I’ve seen of it) weird because each of his wives lives separately and they “time share” the husband. That’s like Raise the Red Lantern. Just weird. If they all lived happily together, I’d find it more agreeable.
The real problem is that if dudes were allowed to marry more than one chick, than all us guys who feel panicked about getting one girl will have to watch the captain of the football team and the sleazy pre-law trust fund frat douche from college take away even more of our chances to get the girl.
Oh yeah! Whenever someone says polygamy “hurts women,” I just roll my eyes. Oh no, they have to share some rich dude. Who it hurts is men, who are forced into a life of loneliness.
Look at those Polygamous Husbands in those cults- often they live in trailers, *eating off food stamps. *It’s not the Playboy Mansion and “Hef’s Girls” it is young women who are forced or brainwashed into a life of drudgery and constant childbearing.
I doubt it would be like that if it were legal. That’s like someone during Prohibition saying that if booze were legal, you’d have bathtub gin being sold in Mob-owned speakeasies all across the country.
Well said.
Right, in societies that allow polygyny it’s usually only high-status wealthy men who have more that one wife. The overwhelming majority of marriages remain monogamus.
Ah, so those scum just would decide not to have their little harem of underaged relatives sleeping with them and serving them hand and foot? That the religious cult would up and disappear?
You do know that back before it was illegal, the old Mormon Church had polygamy like that, right?
The cult brainwashes the women into believing it’s the only way to do things, and of course for those few men that get to become patriarchs, they wish to continue the system.
So you’re saying they had trailers and food stamps back then?
What exactly are you trying to say? Had it like what? If their partners were what you consider underage and close relatives, then what does that have to do with polygamy? Is having sex with young relatives only fun if there’s more than one?
Like maybe what I said “harem of underaged relatives sleeping with them and serving them hand and foot” caused by religious brainwashing?
Your questions are specious and nonsensical.
Jesus, you are nonsensical. You can sleep with young girls and have them bring you sandwiches, even if you do this only with one at a time. What does polygamy have to do with it? Does it necessarily conclude with wives being young, related, and subservient? You’re completely mixing issues.