PlaneShift
Fan Area => The Hydlaa Plaza => Topic started by: Kiern on October 02, 2006, 07:49:18 pm
-
http://www.pokernews.com/news/2006/9/online-poker-bill-passes.htm
For some reason, the US Government feels they have the right to control online gambling(poker).
I currently don't have a job. Why you ask? Because I'm living off of the money I made from poker (online and offline). It's also helping pay some for college right now. Now, should I not be allowed to do this? With money I earned myself?
So, while there is no way they'd be able to completely control this, it does make things harder on me (certain poker rooms won't accept people from the US)...which pisses me off.
Now, is it just me, or is this completely crazy? I'm looking for an argument that supports this that can't be easily knocked down.
-
We have the right to spend our money however the hell we want? There's an arguement.
-
We have the right to spend our money however the hell we want? There's an arguement.
well no, your not allowed to buy drugs or atomic warheads, i think the argument of the bill goes in the same direction that it is considered to be a drug or something (confusing drug addictaion with gambling addiction).
however, this is just another example of the orwellian bullshit that is going on in the states. to quote for the second time today from System of a Down: They try to build a prison for you and me to live in ;)
-
Orwellia BS, exactly! Why make laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves or exploiting people who are sick?
I don't agree or disagree with the law, but if you're going to disagree with it, you're going to need to state your reasons in a more convincing way. That said, the law should have some pretty convincing reasons to exist before one needs to give reason to dislike it.
-
it will just become like cuban cigars.
that and the occurance of money laundering will increase.
-
It's pretty much been like this for a while in the US... but it's just taken several layers of laws to filter through. Hell, they even apply their laws to people outside the US. Two British owners of British gambling companies who's servers are in the UK got arrested in the US for breaching those laws on gambling, because they had no restrictions stopping people in the US using the site. This was _before_ this new law came into affect as well, so basically they arrested them so they could charge them after this law went through. United States of China anyone? :) Aren't these laws unconstitutional? Things like drugs can affect other people who have no choice about it. Online gambling affects _you_ and other people have a choice on whether it affects them, just like normal gambling. Surely if it's ok to have a gun it's ok to gamble online, as the first is more dangerous than the second....
The real reason they're trying to stop it is because they get no tax revenue from it. It's just money (mainly) flowing out of the country.
-
Orwellia BS, exactly! Why make laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves
I don't agree or disagree with the law, but if you're going to disagree with it, you're going to need to state your reasons in a more convincing way.
No. Wrong, wrong, wrong. I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else. Is my playing poker online affecting you in any way, zanzibar? No? Then why do I need to justify it?
I said why I disagree with it, because poker is helping put me through college and allowing me to not get a job so I can focus on studying. I can play poker on MY schedule, not by what my boss tells me to do.
Laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves are complete bull. That goes as far as drugs, etc. but I can at least understand why those are illegal even if I disagree with it. Playing poker online, however, just seems like they're going out of their way to control. They're not going to get any POSITIVE press out of it like the "War on Drugs" or whatever, so I just don't see the purpose.
EDIT: I'm aware some things might not be cohesive, I'm writing this very fast.
[ Edited for language. --Karyuu ]
-
I said "themselves", not "me". Don't put words in my mouth.
-
I said "themselves", not "me". Don't put words in my mouth.
I don't see the difference. I was just using you as an example, if that's what you mean.
-
Orwellia BS, exactly! Why make laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves or exploiting people who are sick?
i begin to understand what kind of a person you are...
/me shakes his head in disbelief
-
I thought the quote from prison song answered all the questions about why...I guess not.
BTW miLosh, good quote! :thumbup:
-
I said "themselves", not "me". Don't put words in my mouth.
I don't see the difference. I was just using you as an example, if that's what you mean.
You don't see the difference between hurting yourself and hurting someone else?
-
I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else.
You don't see the difference between hurting yourself and hurting someone else?
Obviously he does....
-
I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else.
You don't see the difference between hurting yourself and hurting someone else?
Obviously he does....
Exactly. His reaction to my post made no sense.
-
I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else.
You don't see the difference between hurting yourself and hurting someone else?
Obviously he does....
Exactly. His reaction to my post made no sense.
No. You just made an arbitrary statement to my entire post. If you're only going to reply to part of it, then please quote that part so I know to which part you're referring to. I have no idea where I'm putting words in your mouth, and I don't think I did.
-
Orwellia BS, exactly! Why make laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves or exploiting people who are sick?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else.
I don't see how our statements contradict.
-
Orwellia BS, exactly! Why make laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves or exploiting people who are sick?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else.
I don't see how our statements contradict.
Thank you. Now I can clarify.
First, my first two paragraphs:
No. Wrong, wrong, wrong. I do NOT need to justify how I spend MY money as long as it is not harming anyone else. Is my playing poker online affecting you in any way, zanzibar? No? Then why do I need to justify it?
I said why I disagree with it, because poker is helping put me through college and allowing me to not get a job so I can focus on studying. I can play poker on MY schedule, not by what my boss tells me to do.
EDIT: I'm aware some things might not be cohesive, I'm writing this very fast.
Was referring to the latter half of the quote (the part you didn't put in your quote). About why I disagree with it (which I directly referenced).
And this last paragraph:
Laws designed to prevent people from hurting themselves are complete bull. That goes as far as drugs, etc. but I can at least understand why those are illegal even if I disagree with it. Playing poker online, however, just seems like they're going out of their way to control. They're not going to get any POSITIVE press out of it like the "War on Drugs" or whatever, so I just don't see the purpose.
Was more of a general statement about laws to prevent people from hurting themselves. I wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with you, as I don't know if you were being sarcastic or not. It seems to me like you were serious because of the "taking advantage of" part of your post. If so, I completely 100% disagree with you on the first part and completely 100% agree with you on the second part, and I don't see why you talk about them like they're the same thing
[ Edited for language. --Karyuu ]
-
When I buy things online, I don't pay tax. The government doesn't like that. For years, they have tried to pass laws about that as well. The same goes for online gambling. They couldn't tax you on your earnings, so they did the next best thing, made it illegal. And this type of thinking is at every level of governemnt, not just federal.
Similar to a small child that has a toy, but is told to share it with thier brother/sister, but since they don't want to share, they smash the toy. "If I can't have it, no one else will either."
-------
If a peson is not happy with the laws that thier elected officals have made, then it is their duty as a citizen of their country to educate themselves on the officials that voted for and against such laws that were made that they agreed with and disagreed with, and then on November 7th (voting day in the USA) they will make thier voice heard by voting for either new officals to replace the ones currently in office or, if they liked the laws passed, they will vote to keep the officals in office right now, there for another term.
The real problem is not the elected officals, but the people that put them in office to begin with. If the majority of people would educate themselves about the people they voted for rather than voting for what thier minister or preist or parents or friends or voting down party lines, etc etc etc tells them what they should vote for, then things would be much different from what they are now. But that's a perfect society, one we don't live in. So we deal with the one we have now, and try to change it the best we can.
I take it you will be at the voting office come next month then.
-
I saw this on the news in England yesterday. I was like :o
How can they ban online poker? People can spend thier money on whatever they want.
Why dont they just do anything useful for a change.