Florida may have just made one such piece of legislation when they wrote and passed a bill that was intended to ban slot machines and Internet cafes in an attempt to shut down online gambling, which raises its own set of questions, but let's focus here. Here is what they defined as a slot machine:
any machine or device or system or network of devices that is adapted for use in such a way that, upon activation, which may be achieved by, but is not limited to, the insertion of any piece of money, coin, account number, code, or other object or information, such device or system is directly or indirectly caused to operate or may be operated and if the user, whether by application of skill or by reason of any element of chance or any other outcome unpredictable by the user.
Which describes anything on which you can access the Internet. And just about any game into which you input information before playing, which means, among other things, I believe they've just banned World of Warcraft, which requires a subscription to play, requires you to tell it whose account you're using to operate it, and relies on both skill and chance (e.g. loot drops).
If you're reading this from Florida: what are you doing? Reading things on the Internet like a common criminal. You scofflaw, you.
One of the Internet cafe operators who had to shut down their business, Consuelo Zapata, is challenging the legislation in court, claiming the bill was passed "in a frenzy fueled by distorted judgment in the wake of a scandal that included the lieutenant governor's resignation." In the process, Zapata and attorney Alan Dershowitz have argued a constitutional violation of free speech and due process, as well as being too broad and vague to actually be able to enforce.
Let's put it this way: if it was enforceable, it would be illegal for, oh, say, the Tampa Bay Times to go online and post a writeup.