 |
|
05-04-2007, 06:39 PM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
interesting implications
The below takes online betting in a direction different than, "they can't possibly arrest everyone, and as long as everyone is doing it, I'm safe." Sheriff Joe has other ideas.
http://www.abc15.com/news/local/stor...9-e3b8d4217e8c
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 07:28 PM
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
|
I'm not impressed.
If internet wagering was licensed and regulated our law enforcement officials could spend their time trying to fight real crime.
Also, our tax dollars could be put to better use -- not to mention the tax dollars that would be generated from internet gambling revenue.
Concerned bettors should bombard their elected officials with letters expressing their displeasure with the current laws.
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 07:57 PM
|
#3
|
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,646
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by traynor
|
This example is absolutely no different than any other illegal bookmaker that ever existed -- internet or no internet.
The off-shores ARE legal, in their respective countries of origin. That's just a slight difference from the example in the article.
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 08:07 PM
|
#4
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,138
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by swetyejohn
I'm not impressed.
If internet wagering was licensed and regulated our law enforcement officials could spend their time trying to fight realcrime.
Also, our tax dollars could be put to better use -- not to mention the tax dollars that would be generated from internet gambling revenue.
Concerned bettors should bombard their elected officials with letters expressing their displeasure with the current laws.
|
Be sure to include a donation to their campign(s). 
Preferably an OTB ticket they would have to go and cash and perhaps even sign for. 
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 08:47 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
This example is absolutely no different than any other illegal bookmaker that ever existed -- internet or no internet.
The off-shores ARE legal, in their respective countries of origin. That's just a slight difference from the example in the article.
|
Whether a business is legal or not in its respective country of origin is irrelevant from the standpoint of anyone who is not residing in, and a citizen of, that country. It is the law of the country of legal residence of the individual that determines applicability.
Example: using the criteria of "legal in host country," I can set up a paper business in any one of a dozen countries for a few hundred dollars, then start peddling pirated software, DVDs, and whatever else, based on the idea that it is acceptable in the host country (the "location" of my business), therefore it is legal in Poughkeepsie, Peoria, and Phoenix. It doesn't work like that.
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 08:55 PM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by swetyejohn
I'm not impressed.
If internet wagering was licensed and regulated our law enforcement officials could spend their time trying to fight real crime.
Also, our tax dollars could be put to better use -- not to mention the tax dollars that would be generated from internet gambling revenue.
Concerned bettors should bombard their elected officials with letters expressing their displeasure with the current laws.
|
The definition of real crime being something that affects you personally? Or perhaps an area outside the range of your normal activities, hence something "they" do, as opposed to things that "we" (good folk all) do?
The definition of "real crime" is highly subjective, and depends on individual experience. I can understand and appreciate your view (even agree with it to a limited extent), but in such a subjective area, it seems everyone would have a unique description for what constitutes a "real crime."
Bombarding elected officials with letters expressing displeasure is the equivalent of carrying signs and "protesting" some thing or another. It is something that is allowed to create the impression of meaningful activity, while producing little, if any, real effect.
Gee. Sort of like posting on PA.
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 08:56 PM
|
#7
|
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,646
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by traynor
Gee. Sort of like posting on PA.
|
Well if that's how you see it, how dumb are you?
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 11:18 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by traynor
Gee. Sort of like posting on PA.
|
Guess you won't be wasting any more time posting here, then, right?
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2007, 11:41 PM
|
#9
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,138
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by traynor
... Bombarding elected officials with letters expressing displeasure is the equivalent of carrying signs and "protesting" some thing or another. It is something that is allowed to create the impression of meaningful activity, while producing little, if any, real effect.
Gee. Sort of like posting on PA.
|
At least posting on PA is therapeutic and, every once and awhile, you actually get a meaningful response. The only response I have ever received from any elected official has been a form letter, a request for a campaign contributuon, or both. 
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2007, 02:16 AM
|
#10
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
Well if that's how you see it, how dumb are you?
|
Not dumb enough to blindly accept a posting suggesting that because an enterprise is legal in its host country, it is legal everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2007, 02:18 AM
|
#11
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Indulto
At least posting on PA is therapeutic and, every once and awhile, you actually get a meaningful response. The only response I have ever received from any elected official has been a form letter, a request for a campaign contributuon, or both. |
Therapeutic is good. Dialogue is even better.
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2007, 02:20 AM
|
#12
|
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,646
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by traynor
Not dumb enough to blindly accept a posting suggesting that because an enterprise is legal in its host country, it is legal everywhere.
|
Who suggested that? Better read said post again....
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2007, 05:27 PM
|
#13
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 18
|
Maybe it's time to just change the damn law, like this opinion piece in the LA Times suggests:
Last edited by BillW; 05-05-2007 at 05:32 PM.
Reason: Cpoyrighted material - Please link only per TOS
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2007, 06:11 PM
|
#14
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 18
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-06-2007, 08:02 PM
|
#15
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
Who suggested that? Better read said post again....
|
Perhaps you should read the article again. Or consult an attorney for a clarification of exactly how, what, and where a US citizen can wager with impunity. I am not in the business of giving legal advice (as I am sure you are not, nor intend to be), and some people may inadvertently break laws based on opinions posted as advice.
I don't think that "PA said it was OK" is going to fly as a legal defense. One of the most basic facts is that "ignorance of the law is no defense." If a bettor wants to bet offshore, that is fine and dandy. The issue for US citizens and residents is whether they are breaking US laws, not whether the betting site is legal in its host country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
