As Washington State turns people who choose to play online poker in their own homes into class C felons, just like sex offenders, the Los Angeles Times editorial board comes out in favor of common sense:"Doesn't the federal government have better things to do than try to block people from going online to make a wager on the Super Bowl or the Final Four?
Supporters of the measures [prohibiting online wagering, poker, and gaming] insist they are trying to curb the spread of gambling addiction, protect minors and crack down on unscrupulous offshore operators. They may be right about online gambling's link to self-destructive spending, given its isolating, rat-at-the-pellet-bar quality. But the fact that the House bills wouldn't outlaw online betting on horse racing, which Congress allowed states to authorize in 2000, seems to belie the sincerity of the effort. And isn't it a hallmark of a free society that we don't outlaw otherwise inoffensive vices simply because some people harm themselves?
We've been saying this for months, and it's nice to see a widely-read paper in the mainstream media pick up the common sense refrain.
The prohibition of online gaming, including poker and other casino games, in the name of "protecting" anyone is disingenuous and hypocritical while the government turns a blind eye to horse racing (lobby) and more state lotteries than there are hookers in Amsterdam. We're all adults here, and we're very capable of taking care of ourselves.
(Thanks, Russ!)
1. "And isn't it a hallmark of a free society that we don't outlaw otherwise inoffensive vices simply because some people harm themselves?"
Our government applies laws like this in a totally random way. Look at Alcohol for example, it is allowed, while if you smoke a join your going to jail. Both in my eyes at least seem to have almost the same effects. Alot of what they decide to attack depends on the opinion of there constituants and how much money they get from lobbying groups.
Posted at 4:55PM on Jun 10th 2006 by SirFWALGMan