Yes you can! (nothing to do with Obama)

[reho33]

I was looking around the web and on the New Mexico Gaming Control Board's site they have a section "Home Slot machines" This came about because of the ruling by the NM Supreme Court (NMGB V Ten gaming Machines) opinion that another member brought up on here a while ago. Basically here's what it says:

1) Slot machines 25 yrs old and older are not bound by these rules
2) You may only buy a machine from a NM distributor
3) He (or she) is the only one that can deliver it to your home
4) It is illegal for you to move the machine yourself.
5) Payback chips in the machine must be 100% or greater.
6) People can only play for winnings (I don't get that one)
7) You can't sell it to anyone.
8) A sign on the front has to state that it is amusement only and that gambling is a felony
9) A sign on the back has to state that it is illegal to move the machine if your not a distributor.

WHEW!
 I can't find any entity that is a NM distributor (they don't list them on the website) I would venture that no one pay attention to those rules. These are the same people that want to take your pachislos and crush them........


This is about as useful as the law that states that you cannot put on lipstick while riding backwards on a horse on Sunday.........

[stayouttadabunker]

"6) People can only play for winnings."

What is going through the person's mind that came up with this line?
It certainly craves some clarification I would say...

[jdkmunch]

I guess  -  you can't put your own money in - you can only collect money.  So as a homeowner you can give people money if you want.    

[reho33]

I think (?) that it means that what ever money is put into the machine has to come from the player's pockets (you can't fill the hopper up with your own money) But it is still gambling so that precludes that! I don't know. But if you read the ruling it is intresting as it could set a precedent for the other states. basically the SC concluded that:
1) No money, no gambling (tokens were being used)
2) No reward, no gambling.
3) A slot machine is not a gaming device in this situation because it was not being used for gambling
4) The mere fact that it could be used for gambling and that it was readily available did not meet the definition of a gaming device.

       So the supreme court of NM rightly found for the defendants, they were just like us playing their slots in their homes for fun and not gambling. The court also ruled that the board had no right to take the machines and they had to be returned, unharmed. If it was me, and ANY of them were damaged, I would sue the s--t out of them. So maybe if someone else might be in the same position in another state, they could have their layer cite this case and it might just get the wheels rolling so that someday we all could "come out" and not feel like criminals.

[jay]

I think it is and attempt to articulate the Pinball law...... you don't win anything other than a free game.....and thus continued play.
In otherwords any tokens you receive are not redeemable for cash.
With a % greater than 100% you better not be paying out cash

[uniman]

I think (?) that it means that what ever money is put into the machine has to come from the player's pockets (you can't fill the hopper up with your own money) But it is still gambling so that precludes that! I don't know. But if you read the ruling it is intresting as it could set a precedent for the other states. basically the SC concluded that:
1) No money, no gambling (tokens were being used)
2) No reward, no gambling.
3) A slot machine is not a gaming device in this situation because it was not being used for gambling
4) The mere fact that it could be used for gambling and that it was readily available did not meet the definition of a gaming device.

       So the supreme court of NM rightly found for the defendants, they were just like us playing their slots in their homes for fun and not gambling. The court also ruled that the board had no right to take the machines and they had to be returned, unharmed. If it was me, and ANY of them were damaged, I would sue the s--t out of them. So maybe if someone else might be in the same position in another state, they could have their layer cite this case and it might just get the wheels rolling so that someday we all could "come out" and not feel like criminals.

I would have recorded the meter readings at the time of confiscation and then check them when returned. I would wager they got a lot of play in the police property room.