This is going a bit to far with the Anti gambling laws in Washington State

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
29,752
Tokens
Danny Westneat
Seattle Times
Sunday, June 9

Read this while it's still legal




As most of us toasted liberty and pursued happiness last week, Jim Harvill opened his mailbox and learned these rights are not as unalienable as he thought.

On July 3, Harvill, an affable operations manager for Sprint PCS near Spokane, got the following letter from the publisher of two magazines he has subscribed to for years. "It is with deep regret that we must inform you ... " it read, "we must cancel all subscriptions to Washington State."

The magazines are "Casino Player" - a monthly review of U.S. casinos and hotels - and "Strictly Slots" - a guide to one-armed bandits, video poker and other mechanized means of gambling.

Hardly classic literature. But Harvill liked them. And now he can no longer read them, thanks to a twisted reading of the state's new law against Internet gambling.

The state says placing bets online is against the law. Fine. But the state goes on to say that even writing about Internet gambling in a way that's promotional is "aiding and abetting" an illegal industry.

So now two print magazines consider themselves banned in this state. It's not clear whether the publisher pulled them on his own or was asked to by the state. The letter vaguely cites "new state laws regarding the legality of online gaming."

Mind you, no actual betting occurs via these magazines. People like Harvill buy them just to read about gambling.

"It's completely surreal," Harvill says. "My government is saying there is something I'm not allowed to read. I've lived in this country for 60 years and I can't remember anything like this happening to me before."

Well, it has certainly happened to others. Ask Larry Flynt. But it is almost never allowed to stand. Has to do with all that stuff we heard ad nauseam last week about independence and the freedom to think and speak as we want.

The nation's birthday week was a dark one for the most unruly and inconvenient of our freedoms, expression.

We learned that a high-school band in Everett had been barred from playing "Ave Maria" because the song is too religious. This is as baffling as if an art class were not permitted to study Michelangelo.

And then a Fort Lewis Army officer, who was properly accused of refusing to ship out to Iraq, was inexplicably charged for saying "contemptuous words against the President of the United States."

Lt. Ehren Watada had said the president misled us into a war that, in retrospect, was a mistake. Shocking! Even in the military, how can stating the obvious be a jailable offense?

I realize there are arguments for all these clampdowns. Still, it ought to give us pause that in one Fourth of July week we had two magazines banned in the state, one song muzzled in a school district and a slew of words outlawed in the military.

Would a confident people do this to themselves?

Oh, well. So we can't read up on Internet betting. Students can't play songs about Jesus' mother. Soldiers can't call the president a charlatan.

If we all get really bored, at least we can still burn the flag.

http://archives.seattletimes.n...0060709&query=gambling
 

New member
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
3,741
Tokens
Well at least all the religious nuts and fruitcakes in this country have a state that can call home. "WASHINGTON". I would hope they all move there and eventually succeed from the Union.
I will try my hardest to not buy ANY product that comes out of that state.
 

CURATOR / MEMBER EMERITUS
Joined
Dec 21, 1999
Messages
3,061
Tokens
I bet the pubs/eds pulled out on their own...legal action, which would likely end up exonerating them in th courts eventually, could destroy them financially.

The courts 'should' eventually render most of that legislation kaput...
 

New member
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
3,741
Tokens
Regardless of what the State courts do "maybe" in the future ---anyone that thinks they can't enforce the law is not up with today's technology.
Suppose for instance they wish to levy a fine on people visiting websites (or God Forbid playing online.) They simply require the Internet service provider to send to the govrnment those accounts which go to various designated websites.(A list would be started and added to as time passes). From there they send out a legal letter with a notice to pay a fine to the Sates for x dollars for this first offense. Subsequent offences will result in high fines. Easy revenue for the state ! Big Brother is WATCHING.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
28,775
Tokens
This is so far overboard, it's mindblowing. I have to wonder if they really understood what they were enacting into law.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,781
Tokens
Whoson1st said:
Well at least all the religious nuts and fruitcakes in this country have a state that can call home. "WASHINGTON". I would hope they all move there and eventually succeed from the Union.
I will try my hardest to not buy ANY product that comes out of that state.

You are foolish to think they would be happy there. Washington is a rather liberal place with only farmers in the middle to level things out. There is more legal gambling there than any other state other than Nevada.

This was just a protectionist law and a bit of a backlash as some people are saying there is too much gambling available. People vote with their money though and if there was too much, most of the businesses wouldn't be operating so you really have to question the mindset of the politicians.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
3,741
Tokens
WildBill said:
You are foolish to think they would be happy there. Washington is a rather liberal place with only farmers in the middle to level things out. There is more legal gambling there than any other state other than Nevada.

This was just a protectionist law and a bit of a backlash as some people are saying there is too much gambling available. People vote with their money though and if there was too much, most of the businesses wouldn't be operating so you really have to question the mindset of the politicians.

Liberal is as Liberal does. LOL You are right, I think all these terms are overused today. Right wing left wing. Conservative -Liberal. On and On.
But when a magazine company fears mailing to a resident--that's pretty far out there. A rose by any other name is ---well you know.
The USA is ALL about MONEY. We all talk a good line about whatever point we are striving to make, but the bottom line comes down to greenbacks. Even the religious folks allow time to pass thie collection plates and the government has sabctioned that by allowing a tax deduction for giving.
How much money did that guy recently give Bill and Linda Gates to manage. I can't pronounce it. But, he probably couldn't keep it all anyway.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
6,480
Tokens
What Washington's New Felony Poker Law Means to You
By I. Nelson Rose
8 July 2006


This column was among the first to break the news that the Washington State Legislature intended to make playing poker online a felony.

On June 7, that became the law.

But in an interview with Rick Day, Director of the Washington State Gambling Commission, I was able to confirm that regular players have no reason to fear going to prison.

Rick explained that the law was primarily designed to do three things:

Prevent the State Lottery from offering games on the Internet;
Clarify that all online gambling is illegal; and
Give the Commission and other Washington law enforcement authorities additional weapons in their fight against Internet gambling operators.
I believe the Legislature did not merely clarify existing law, but actually expanded the anti-gambling statutes to cover poker and other forms of gambling. But it makes no difference now. And it is always better to have a law that clearly spells out what is and is not covered, rather than have to fight about it in court.

The new felony law will give the Washington state government more tools to go against operators. Even if Internet poker had fallen under the pre-June 7th law, it was only a gross misdemeanor. Other states are usually willing to help with felony investigations. But requests for out-of-state search warrants on misdemeanor criminal charges are given a low priority.

Rick confirmed my analysis that making gambling a state felony brings in the powerful, federal anti-racketeering statutes. Specifically RICO, Racketeered Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, can now be used to seize all of the assets of an illegal gambling operation.

It should be noted that the federal government has, so far, shown little interest in using RICO to go after foreign operators. That may change, now that Washington State has made Internet gambling a felony. But the RICO statutes still have weaknesses, including not stating explicitly that they can be used against foreign-licensed operators.

As for players - merely being an online poker player does, theoretically, run a risk of a felony conviction. However, Rick made it clear that there is not going to be an active campaign against regular players.

If players' names appear in an operator's seized records, it is possible they could receive warning letters, reminding them that betting online is now a felony. If a player's name appears again, Rick said, charges might be filed.

Personally, I doubt the state will ever send out many of those letters. And I doubt mere players will ever be charged, unless they ignore repeated warnings.

Although playing now can be treated as a Class C felony, it is wrong to say that gambling is now equivalent legally to a sex offense. First offenders under the new anti-gambling law face only a maximum of 90 days in county jail, not years in prison. And Rick confirmed that he would expect first-time convicted players to receive no jail time at all.

Still, no one wants to have a felony conviction on his record. But even here, the state has great discretion, and would probably only charge even dedicated players with a misdemeanor.

I don't want to give the impression that I think this law is a good idea. But I do think players should know that they will never see the inside of a prison for merely making bets online.

© Copyright 2006. Professor I Nelson Rose is recognized as one of the world's leading experts on gambling law. His latest books, GAMING LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS and INTERNET GAMING LAW, are available through his website, www.GAMBLINGANDTHELAW.com.
 

Respect My Steez
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
6,453
Tokens
I would scrap our entire governmental system and start brand new if I had the power. That is being honest - the system is completely broken and beyond repair
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,193
Messages
13,449,319
Members
99,400
Latest member
steelreign
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com