Slashdot Mirror
Mass. Gambling Bill Would Criminalize Online Poker
timothy writes "Awesome: 'A gambling bill introduced by Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo criminalizes Internet gambling and online poker. The bill calls for two casinos.' Not that they're against gambling, you see... just against being deprived of a monopoly in such a perfect fleecing opportunity."
Slashdot is mostly centered around the United States. And in case you're unaware, the United States is a bunch of united states with their own separate laws. Not that much is legislated federally; news about Massachusetts law (a particularly influential state, in fact) is as notable as any other legal news.
Some states have rules decided based on whether it's a game of chance or skill.
For example, pinball was hotly contested in some states, because there are some luck elements - especially because early pinballs paid out. (And they didn't have flippers, so it was almost entirely chance at first.) Some of those luck elements (free games, match, etc.,) must be disabled in some states, to be on the skill side of the chance vs. skill threshold.
Some states require that games of skill not pay out, some of them have a certain legal tests for what a game of skill is (they essentially boil down to something along the lines of, can a skilled player win even with all luck elements being against them, IIRC,) etc., etc.
Fortunately nobody but you has proposed banning everything pleasurable. So far they are just banning (actually just RESTRICTING) a few things that are pleasurable to some people but cause severe problems for many of those people, and for society at large.
To be accurate, they haven't proposed restricting the ability for people to gamble. They've only proposed restricting gambling at venues that are competing with the casinos they are proposing to create. Since Internet casinos don't require physical presence and physical ones do, this proposal will most likely increase the number of gamblers in the state.