What is in Conflict:
> The other thing wrong with the US Mining LAW of 1872 is a conflict with an upstart Securities Exchange Act of 1934 encouraging "truth in securities" REGULATIONS have somehow evolved into a support group of a protected mining investment monopoly securities system, as very lucrative IPO's, and through a very un-defendable "Blue Sky" exclusion that small private investors in a mining law state some must be insider trading qualified for already being a $1,000,000-aire.
> The disparity, of the legal precedent conflicts having something with "securities" being the right to ownership connected with tradable derivatives have to do with location, which lately has been how far away mining states are away from powerful nanosecond flash trading computers.
1) In gold rush California the the people's law of governing contentious was that a handshake was all it took to form a "mining company." Contrary to Hollywood's interpretation of this, except singers Clint Eastwood and Lee Marvin in Paint Your Wagon, and the Brett Heart first hand media reports from Poker Flat supported the "Prudent Man Doctrine" that a group of investors working together really did not need Back East Blue Sky protection for being a Western widow[er] and orphan (which I happen to be).
2) After the mining camp promulgation of the rules of working together (without bloodshed, and an earned appreciation for fellow American-Chinese miners companies) were adopted into The Mining Law of 1872, there remained (to this day) the Association Placer Claim, which with eight undivided interests across 160 acres was what the Securities Law mavens consider an illegal, unregistered security.
3) And the curious fact that lode claim owners are entitled to follow extra-lateral rights, even across and underneath the surface boundaries of a mineral rights claim, even if that be private land. This is well supported by case law citations. And as a mining claim, with an assigned state number, is in effect a long term contract with the U.S. Government, those with a newly acquired GPS mentality need to be aware of the legal term, "in mineral trespass."
4) And finally, there was a mining claim ruling by a Judge, known for his non-qualified underground mineral assessment, that the value of the property dispute before him, was as worthless as the "Blue Sky above." This absolutely should be challenged today in that clean air blue sky can be measured in carbon fuel credits.
Unfortunately for the 19 mineral entry states of the West, those New York City slickers somehow made the "Blue Sky Laws" the poster child of mining securities fraud. This is why there are discriminatory exclusion laws in said states concerning the qualification of investors, who apparently are not smart enough to understand unless they are have a net worth of $1,000,000 they can't play the game. Sorry Charlie, the bargain isle tuna fish red herring, who really is a sucker.
>> The point of this web site of a book in progress, that I am sure will come with all sorts of pseudo Internet "secure" warning tags to get through, is that:
5) Yes, it is perfectly legal as an individual to purchase a documented value ton of a validated 1872 Mining Law mineral deposit, in place. Said ton does not need to be defined by GPS coordinates that might not fit the exact location of an a validated Bureau of Land Management / U.S. Forest Service, Plan of Action respecting, and protecting the environment. A Plan of Action, would be difficult for an small holding to qualify to dig where they feel entitled, hence the need to disqualify individual investors for not already being certified millionaires in a "good old boy securities approved private investment clubs."
Small 1872 miners totally understand that their only hope is U.S. Government sensible plan of actions concerning public lands, roads, and water, prevails. Said approved citizen actions really is a bypass to the red flags of big board "casino capitalism" owners making the "you are fired" Donald Trump mistake of paying an army of lawyers, whose brief if, "those who have gold in the Banks of Bonanza Creek," rule through securities case law.
6) And that American investors, who are already at a free trade tax, and securities law disadvantage as manipulated by multinational banks "too big to jail," really need to understand that the "golden fleece" begins when sheep are corralled to be flocked, through not understanding that:
A) Not making a "drop dead" deadline in paying a BLM "rental" on claims that cannot be insured by a title company, is not the same as the grace period of of a sheriffs farm sale on the courthouse steps.
And, please do not block the way into the county recorders office to file a state claim (jumper) documents where the party is is totally aware they have the top default position for 90 days to formally file for a new US BLM recorded number that covers the mineral rights, no matter the made up, or slightly different, claim name.
B) What a way for golden parachute CEO to survive bankruptcy, stockholder lawsuits, and reclamation obligations, without loosing anything! What a way for Toronto Stock Exchange shell game "pumped up listings" to raise millions millions through an international stock broker placements, only to step back by not meeting contract obligations, the "dumping," which causes a well touted stock (including promised options) to fall back to 01¢ per share.
C) What a way, even in an Alaska with much tighter securities laws, to allow a favored nation Hong Kong/Vancouver puppet junior IPO the opportunity to take advantage of the free trade TSX "in Canadian interests" 43-101 slur that Alaskan miners are in such short supply that there was a need to allow EB-5 green cards to be sold to Asian workers.
|