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.'"

5 of 535 comments (clear)

  1. Might as well kill someone before you gamble. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  2. God bless.. by OzPhIsH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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"

  3. Indian casino lobbyists at work by xswl0931 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  4. Re:Here's an idea for new laws..... by jetlagQ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  5. Just what we need -- more NIMBY irrelevant laws by istartedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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"?