Slashdot Mirror


WA Law: 5 Years in Prison for Gambling Online

tpoker writes "Online gambling has been an ongoing legal issue for the federal government, but Washington State has recently decided to take matters into their own hands. The Seattle PI reports, 'Beginning next month [June 7th], Washington residents who play poker or make other types of wagers on the Internet will be committing a Class C felony, equivalent under the law to possessing child pornography, threatening the governor or torturing an animal. Although the head of the state Gambling Commission says it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest, the new law carries stiff penalties: as much as five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.'"

7 of 535 comments (clear)

  1. Age old problem... by dotoole · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When will people learn that you can't legislate away social problems?

  2. Nonsense by NBarnes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pardon me, but what the hell is the point of this law if "it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest"? Selective enforcement... for the win!

  3. No buying selling stocks online? by dotslashdot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does that mean you can't buy & sell stocks online?

  4. Dumb Law... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although the head of the state Gambling Commission says it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest, the new law carries stiff penalties: as much as five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

    There should be a law that you can't put a law on the books with no intention of enforcing it. The law has enough baggage from previous years when politicians would grandstand for the "hang 'em high" crowd. I suggest hanging high anyone who puts a useless law on the book. :P

  5. The state hates competition by hsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look it, the only reason that the gov't HATES online gambling is because it doesn't get paid tribute.

    The gov't hates when industries that rake in cash don't pay special tribute by donating, ect. Look at how google is now throwing out cash to avoid investigations and avoid the trouble MS had in the 90's.

    Pay tribute to the masters and you can do what you want.

    plus the state has a monopoly on gambling (state lotteries), they don't want that threatened. so lets throw harmless people in jail for a non-violent, victimless crime. Yes, america "home of the free" what a load of crap

  6. Just one more personal freedom lost by AriaStar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can choose to smoke cigarettes around a newborn baby, even blowing smoke in its face, and it's completely legal, but to gamble your own money should be a crime? Because they can tax the cigarettes, but it's difficult to enforce taxes on online winnings. Without that tax money, how are they supposed to vote themselves more payraises? There is no logical reason for this. If you think about it, most laws are in place for no reason other than as reasons to fine us or tax us to death.

    The original purpose of laws at all was to impose a minimal number of laws to ensure the safety of lives and property of citizens. How does it ensure the safety of my life or property if I cross a suburban street anywhere other than a street corner if no cars are coming? I learned to look both ways. It's still a crime a cop could fine me for.

    What politician does it hurt if two guys want to go consensually behind closed and do whatever the hell they want to do with each other? Who does it hurt if I want to give a guy a blow job, or he wants to go down on me? Hell, we're adults, and yet these are still crimes in some states. Must we get permits?

    See why I like a lot (but not all) of the ideas behind anarchy? Get the government the hell out of our lives.

  7. Re:How do you set fireworks off by accident? by Warg!+The+Orcs!! · · Score: 5, Insightful
    By extension most murderers shouldn't be jailed. Most murders (in the UK certainly) are committed in the spur of the moment where the two parties are known to each other and something has gone suddenly wrong in the course of an argument. The perpetrator will rarely commit this act a second time in his/her life and is not a danger to society in general. There are other crimes regarded as "lesser" in nature that should really have more stringent sentencing. Rape springs to mind where the likelihood of the perpetrator re-offending is much greater than in the case of murder. So to re-order crimes according to the liklihood of recidivism
    • Counsel the murderers
    • Jail the rapists
    • Hang bad drivers
    --
    Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.