is it just gambling with credit cards that is illegal (which I could never imagine doing anyway) or have they made it illegal to gamble online using debit cards too?
I can’t see why the system would tolerate such a situation; I mean, I can see why Malcontent would like it in this particular episode, but after the toxic-waste-kitten-rape bill gets passed, isn’t it likely that Malcontent will find himself cast as Protagonist in the next episode?
I can earn a small amount pimping girls. It’s not fair that the state makes my job illegal. I’m not exchanging sex-for-money; I’m just in marketing and security. What’s wrong with that?
The government is well within its rights (pending a potential judicial review). Gambling is mostly illegal in the majority of states (excluding gambling that directly profits the states). Offshore operators were circumventing the laws of the land.
Now excuse me while I drive out to the casino and legally lose my shirt.
Maybe then you could find an example of where this sort of cheating occurred. I very much doubt that you can. Why go to the huge expense and effort of setting up a gaming site and then advertising enough to attract customers just to shut it down a little while later? All of your sunk costs are spent and now you have this great cash cow. The economics make no sense.
Your first cite is about thieves using stolen credit cards to fleece on-line betting sites.
Your second one is about a couple of law suits where a very small number of people claim that they were taken advantage of but we don’t know the story.
The major poker gambling sites have been around for many years. People do not have a problem recovering their money. This is not a problem.
So is there any list of which senators voted for this bill yet?
Major poker gambling sites aren’t a problem, in the same way Amazon isn’t a problem. However, people will buy that new XBox360 at Joe’Shop if they think they can save $10. After a week of sitting on top of PriceGrabber’s list, taking orders for XBoxes, Joe takes the money and runs. The fact that the vast majority people shop at Amazon and other reputable retailers doesn’t mean that con artists don’t try to fleece whomever they can. The difference is that one can report Joe’Shop, as one was engaging in a legal transaction. The same person would have trouble reporting Joe’Casino. Most reports I’ve read have questioned the legality of online gambling, if not outright proclaiming it illegal. You might as well report that someone stole your cocaine.
I’ll tell you what makes no sense: the logic that businesses must be more honest if they are worth more money, expensive to start up or operate, or are publicly traded. Everyone thought Enron was the real deal, now we know it was rotten to the core. At least real casinos have actual regulators to make sure they are on the level.
As far as dishonest poker sites, here’s one list I found after 5 seconds of googling. I have no idea of the authenticity of the claims, but it speaks to the rather absurd notion that all online poker sites must be on the square because they make a lot of money.
http://www.pokerscams.org/blacklist.html
Also, Wiki says this:
“However, to date there has been at least one site, ProPoker.com, that has been found to use serverside bots that play with the knowledge of players’ cards and the cards yet to be dealt. It has since been shut down, with many players losing the funds they had on the site.”
I just find it hard to believe that anyone would think that the online casino business is as pure as the driven snow.
Jeez, my google-fu is even weaker than I thought.
Did anyone say it was? People are questioning whether it is intrinsically bent to the point of requiring prohibition, which given the level of proof so far seems to be not an “argument” so much as pure dogma. Online businesses of all kinds trade off reputation as much as others–casinos probably more–and you don’t get to be a large, well-respected business while systematically screwing your customers; particularly not when the con is so readily observable. You cite a consumer-led site tracking untrustworthy gambling sites; I can find you a whole bunch of places that rate online retailers, and I don’t hear cries that they should be banned. Doesn’t this just show that scams can be and are spotted, and that any sensible user should be able to find out if he’s likely to be pissing his money away?
And no, I don’t buy several hundred dollars worth of equipment from online retailers I’ve never heard of, 10 bucks cheaper or not. I think that’s stupid.
Sounds like a great reason to legalize and regulate the industry.
I firmly believe that is the next step, now that the competition has been killed.
Neither do I, and I agree it’s stupid. But other people do. And that’s why the scams work.
Online gambling was illegal prior to the (future) signing of this Bill. The 1961 - Wire Act prohibits transmission of wagering information in interstate or foreign bets. The ability to gamble online made it simple for offshore operators to ignore U.S. law while transacting in the U.S. This Bill, coupled with the harassing arrests of the CEOs of foreign betting sites while on U.S. law, disincentivizes these foreign corporations from transacting in the U.S.
We can argue whether gambling should be illegal. It’s not uncommon for government to feel the need to ‘protect us from ourselves’ and legislate ‘morality’, whether it’s helmet laws, auto cell phone use laws, fireworks laws, alcohol prohibitions, prostitution laws, etc. Our elected officials, and the people who most vocally and financially support them, feel that soceity needs to be protected from the deleterious effects of unrestrained games of chance. Given the money the local government can make from gambling, I’m surprised by this - just shows how strong the anti-gambling forces are. Or just how lucrative state lotteries are and how loathe states are to potentially cut into that revenue source.
Personally, I believe the passage of this bill is $$ related. I have read estimates that this is a $6 billion dollar business from the U.S. That’s $6 billion not being spent on American business and not being taxed.
And yet somehow poker has been included in the game of chance group. That is beyond stupid. Wouldn’t proving poker to be a game of skill be the easiest court challenge ever? I’m not understanding why this hasn’t already been done.
Mr. 2001, I don’t know their names, but only 2 representatives voted against this bill. But remember this online gambling ban was only a minor unrelated part of a port bill.
Well, not really. Gambling is legal in my state, subject to regulations. There are at least half a dozen card rooms here in town where people legally play poker for cash–as well as blackjack, pai gow poker, and other strict games of chance–and an Indian casino just outside of town that has a compact with the state and features all of the above as well as craps, roulette, and video slots. And yet, online gambling was banned here months ago!
These legislators clearly have no problem with gambling in itself. It’s only online gambling that gets them worked up, and even online gambling is OK with them if you’re betting on horses.
I couldn’t find a specific code defining “games of chance”, however the Labor Law Talk dictionary defines it as:
I think someone would have a very hard time getting poker alone legalised, as the cards are a randomizing device.
Not when I’m dealing.
I’m pretty certain that the horse betting does its best to restrict it to state residents (although horse racing may enjoy certain interstate exemptions). Gambling is left up to the states, though infractions of state gambling laws are federal offenses. That’s the main problem with online gambling. It’s clearly illegal in NY, yet there was no penalty to an offshore firm allowing online gambling in NYS. As best as I can tell, unlike prostitution laws which penalize both prostitutes and johns, NY gambling laws only target the provider.
Note to self: Pack extra aces when playing against Fear Itself.