Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Alon Ipser, post: 1031555, member: 6172"] Sending and e mail to your congressman will accomplish nothing. Our political system is based on the $. Senator Frist attached the UIGEA to the Safe Harbors bill only after unsuccessfully trying to get it passed on it's own merits. I don't know which lobbiest was paying for it but my guess is Native American Casinos or a Religious left wing Org. Before the UIGEA was passed the Justice Department tried to say that Online Poker was illlegal due to the wire act but many legal experts said that the wire act only pertained to sports betting. The Owners of the of offshore online betting that were arrestted before the UIGEA took affect were into both online sports betting as well as Poker and it is my opinion that that if they were strictly poker and not sports betting they would have skated. The Justice Department would not have persued any action against a strictly poker business. As far as online poker is concerned, it is a State issue and not a Federal issue in the US (Like abortion, Roe vs Wade). The UIGEA strictly deals with the banking of of online poker and doesn't actually deal with the legallity of online poker. Here in Washington State, online poker is a felony offense. I can sit here at my computer and play for pennies and it is a felony, while somebody else can spend thousands of dollars playing the same game in a casino, right down the street, legally. Not only that, but the State liscenced online Horse betting right after it made poker illegal. Now tell me why I shouldn't be upset. I don't follow the "Letter of the Law" because the letter of the law has nothing to do with what is right or just. The law has to do with who has the most money. Sorry for the rant but people need to pull their heads out because our country will going the way that all other democracies have gone (Check your history). The President is not above the law, allowing torture and the patriot act. Imminent Domain doesn't mean a contractor can take your house and build a hotel for the betterment of the community. If Dave wants to marry Bob, what gives the government the right to say no when Dave's and Bob's actions effects nobody but Dave and Bob. I'm sorry but this last paragraph may have got off track a little bit but I don't think so. A crime without a victim, is not a crime. If I want to grow a plant in my living room and and cram it in to a bong bowl every once in a while, it affects nobody other than me, so the goverment can **** off. About the only thing I agree on with the government is that driving is a priviledge and not a right. So if you want to ride a bike, put your helmet on. I don't want to pay for medical bills when you crash and turn yourself into a veggie because you weren't wearing a helmet. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us