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.'"
Wow, you can kill someone and get less prison time... Look at the guy in the northeast who set off fireworks in doors and led to 100 people dying and he only got 4 years!
Good game, government.
God bless the good ol' land of the free. This is getting way past rediculous. It seems almost that soon murdering all witnesses that saw you commit some petty crime, like gambliing, will net you less jail time than getting busted for the small thing. I mean, 5 years for sitting at a computer and clicking a mouse. Sadly, it isn't sounding so unusual, but damn, that seems VERY fucking cruel.
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
Most likely the Indian casinos are behind it. Just up the Interstate 5 corridor, from the Oregon border to Seattle, it seems like there must be a friggin casino every 20 miles or so.
I'm actually surprised that Washington of all places was the first to pass this bill. I suspect it might be a "since we can't get a piece of that pie into our tax coffers, we're going to shut it down" type of situation.
In Washington State, Indian reservations are building more and bigger casinos. Online gambling is considered a threat. They have successfully lobbied for this law. That's all there is to it.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060531/ap_on_re_us/se x_offenders_death
Darn election years.
Actually in Washington state, we have a lot of casinos (mostly tribal owned). I'd be willing to bet that the main sponsors of this legislation were backers of said casinos. They want people to drive over to their venues instead of playing online.
I'm a little torn on this issue. On the one hand, I would like to believe adults can make their own decisions and should be allowed to gamble their money away if they wish. On the other hand, I can understand why gambling is illegal in some places because people are simply too stupid or weak willed to recognize and kick a gambling addiction. This seems just as true for online gambling, and if anything I think the anonymity it affords makes it more insipid than "old fashioned" gambling. Part of me wants to say "too bad" for the saps out there, but I can't help but think that you're exposing these (admittedly weak) people to a dangerous environment for the petty enjoyment of others. Gambling is a lot of fun for most people, but it can devastate the lives of a few. I'm not sure I agree with the black and white decision that the former justifies the latter, although most of the posts so far appear to do so.
Wait a minute. There are reasons other than religion why certain types of gambling are wrong and should be restricted. State lotteries are a good example because they take advantage of the poor, desparate and ill-informed. The odds of winning a typical state lottery are thirteen million to one. For the multi-state lotteries, it's in the 145 million to one. While I am sure there are some people who play on a whim, there are a lot more who succumb to emotional reasoning or gambling addition to play when the practical reality is they will never win. Practically any other way they spend their money would be more useful.
As far as online poker, your average person might stand a better chance than with the lottery but not much. With the use of poker bots, the odds for Joe Smith are greatly dimished unless he knows how to utilize poker bots himself or he's sharp enough a card player to recognize when he's facing bots and get out of the game accordingly.
i forget who - maybe jefferson? but long ago someone suggested ALL LAWS should sunset after a generation - since the next generation had no chance to vote on them there was no notion of consent. I like that model. It would also tie the busybodies up just maintaining laws instead of writing new ones. They might have to simplify them too.
IMHO, the purpose of the criminal justice system is not to punish. Let that sink in. I don't want to punish criminals. It's stupid. It's vindictive. It's emotional and it isn't constructive.
What SHOULD be the purpose of the justice system? One thing, and one thing only:
To separate dangerous individuals from society, and keep them separated.
Note, by "dangerous" I mean physicly harmful only. I don't mean, "they don't live like we think they should". I don't mean "they stole a lot of money". Yes. That's right. Thieves don't belong in jail unless they hurt people physicly. If the crime is monetary, there is an excellent argument for RESTITUTION in the form of fines and wage garnishment. There is no good argument for SEPARATION unless the guy waved a gun in somebody's face to get the money.
I may not *like* the Enron criminals, but wouldn't mind living next door to them. These guys are not going to stick a gun in my face and BLOW MY HEAD OFF. They are (probably) not going to rape my children.
Get it, government idiots?
Some guy who plays online poker and smokes weed on the weekends does not belong in jail. If you want to tax the weed and the poker, fine but I am SICK AND TIRED of my government setting child rapists and armed thugs free so they can put functional members of society behind bars because of their particular notions regarding crime and punishment. Frankly, that kid of life sounds like enough punishment.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
"[...] it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest"
- That was my first question, too. So who is this law targeted at?
Simple. People under investigation for unrelated crimes for which there is insufficient evidence to charge or detain, political candidates and anyone the media chooses to highlight breaking it.
Are they charging people who use progressive.com and geico.com now, too? What is insurance but a form of wager?
With gambling, you are spending some money in exchange for the chance of a good return. Your odds are improved if you are skilled or have someone on the inside.
With the stock market, you are investing some money in exchange for the chance of a good return. Your odd are improved if you are skilled or have insider information.
With insurance, you are spending money in exchange for the possibility of a return. Your odds are improved if you know what you are doing (maintaining the correct coverage for your risk) or know something on the inside (i.e. that you plan to kill the person you just took out a policy on, or that they have a secret terminal illness!).
Terry Pratchett's first Discworld book - The Colour of Magic - has a good and humorous explanation of insurance in terms of gambling.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
There should be a law that you can't put a law on the books with no intention of enforcing it.
But then what excuse would the government or police have for persecuting those whose politics or insight they do not appreciate?
This is just like marijuana being illegal. Simply a means to put down those who see through the system.
They prosecute only those who they see as a political or ideological threat. Child molesters and murderers are free to do as they please, as for the most part they believe in the system, they pose no real threat.
Pot smokers however are the spawn of satan in the eyes of the law. If they keep quiet and don't rock the boat they can simply be exploited, should they get too vocal or threaten police or government profit in the trade, they are locked up.
"Sometimes paranoia's just having all the facts."
"A functioning police state needs no police."
Fuck the law - its time for revolution, violence is all they can understand.
For the record, all day today KIRO was running a piece about how reprobates have been running an open air crack cocaine market across the street from the King County courthouse in Seattle (this state's largest city) for years, and even they (one of the largest radio stations in the state) couldn't get police to respond. Note to furriners: the sale and use of crack cocaine is prohibited in the US.
I am curious about what offended our state representatives more... that their sponsors the tribal casinos weren't getting a cut or that the state wasn't getting a share. They're certainly pleased to pander to habitual gamblers with scratch tickets and lotto in every convenience store, gas station and grocery in the state. They get a cut of every bottle (or glass!) of alcohol. Certainly they make more bucks off of a pack of cigarettes than the farmer who grew the tobacco, or anybody else who touched it before it arrived at the consumer -- tax is > 50Pct.
Certainly it wasn't the cops, who must use care now only to pull over offenders driving later model cars so as to not overburden the Justice Profit Center with an excess of violators who can't pay their fines.
Yes, that's Washington - the state where you're safe from online gaming and you can't buy Sudafed because you might make meth with it, but you can sell meth, crack, heroin and Ecstasy with impunity in the Junior High School because there's no profit in arresting you. Click it or ticket. Fines are double in work zones. Thanx.
It offends me that I live in the state that reelected Baghdad Jim http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/903913/po sts after this piece ran.
It would be more honest to put a menu on the state house: Calendar days: $50K, Minor issues: $500k. Major Issues: $4M. Public/Private partnerships like ballparks or public transit: Profit sharing whatever we can fleece the taxpayer for. No law too unenforceable, no cause to liberal. It's for our children, dammit! Won't anyone think of the children?
Do I sound bitter? Yes. My son really deserves an "Alex recognition day" on the state calendar, but where am I gonna get $50K?
Help stamp out iliturcy.