Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 68 of 68
  1. #61
    Ace Fun's Avatar
    Ace Fun is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts


    Everybody tries to come up with all sorts of fancy advanced tricks that don't work. If casinos pre-empted the whole thing by including a tag similar to -
    < META NAME="classification" CONTENT="casino">
    then maybe the lawmakers might have more of a problem in introducing these silly laws. It would also push the responsibility of checking onto people who could actually do the job.
    If the adult industry introduced a similar voluntary code that was used worldwide, then maybe it could start a few changes in attitudes.

  2. #62
    1CasinoListing's Avatar
    1CasinoListing is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    November 2002
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts



    I can see where a tag like that would indeed help towards prevention of underage gambling.

    However, the biggest improvement would be to legalise it based on strict regulations. That way one can work with licenses and put controls in place to make sure licensees adhere to the regulations.

    It could then also be made possible to make use of main stream banking methods like credit / debit cards etc. where an additional check could be put in place with regards to age verification. And this is just one of the many measurements that could be put in place, it would for example also be a lot easier to keep tabs on gambling addiction.

    Of course there are counter arguments with regards to this... for example... who says that a child uses mum's or dad's credit card to gamble (although I think the same argument goes up for a minor buying videos, dvds and computer games that are for over 18s only... where does responsibility lie in those cases?), with online casinos the entry level to gambling becomes lower and therefore it is easier for a gambling addict to get his / her 'fix' without being noticed (again, with legislation regulations could be put in place that stipulate measurements should be put in place to detect this, I think the same applies to land based casinos. The only thing is the entry level... it takes more effort to get into a landbased casino).

    I wonder if the politicians in the US still remember the effects of the alcohol prohibition in the 1920s and early 30s... It didn't work then... it pushed it all 'underground' (httpxx://, so what makes them think it will work now.

    I wonder if there is any pun intended with the new video slot Moonshine being released by MicroGaming end this month...

  3. #63
    bigbcasinos's Avatar
    bigbcasinos is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2003
    South Africa
    Thanked 52 Times in 24 Posts


    I see that, theoretically, the threat posed by the possiblity of this bill being tacked onto the back of the alti lobbying bill has been reduced. Apparently, the fear that HR 4777 may delay the one bill that everyone agrees on going though urgently, has resulted in a good chance that the full threat of this bill will be delayed.

    That brings us back to something that we all alude to here. The fact is that we only need one congressman who sees the potential to propose a bill legalizing gambling.

    I have compiled the basic layout of our reply to the bill but I do feel that we should also focus a campaign on writing to those who would like to go down as makers of history.

    Just think of the plaque in Congressman XXXX's home:

    "How I single handedly brought the tax on billons of Dollars back into the USA System"

    Don't for a moment underestimate the value of regulation on the gambling habits of the "out of control gambler" and the accessability of online gambling to the underaged.

    Here is a statement I would like to make:

    1st World countries are run by the media. How? Well, considering the millions of people that go to vote on the day, very few of them have actually spoken to their representative. They formed their opinion based on what they saw on TV, heard summarised by and analyst, read in the newspaper, AND read on the internet.

    Their thoughts, attitudes, and even bahaviours are moderated by these interactions with the media. Now I ask you, if a well laid out campaign to inform, assist, and raise the standards set by online gambling were launched, shouldn't we expect a resutant drop in gambling dependence, a resultant increase of early dection thereof by casinos, a resultant decrease of attempted use by minors, etc...
    Have a wonderful day

    Online Casinos (Big B Casinos)
    Casino Slots (Casino Slots Wizard)
    Online Slots (Slots Casinos)

  4. #64
    TheCPA's Avatar
    TheCPA is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Thanked 351 Times in 167 Posts


    I heard Kyl is now going to try the sneak play again, and attach it a bill Trent Lott has out there.
    Seems too personal for Kyl sometimes, doesn't it?
    He's not far from Vegas.
    Maybe he drove up there for a weekend, and had to walk back home, so he's hates gamblers now.

  5. #65
    Tony is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Thanked 131 Times in 89 Posts


    Can some one tell me are the casino owners and the affiliated companies invalved in this, can we tell them to read this post, I would like to know what they are doing about it. Do you think is good idea if we all send them an email and invited them to this forum.
    Casinos Cafe UK
    Last edited by Tony; 13 March 2006 at 4:24 pm.

  6. #66
    ntaus's Avatar
    ntaus is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    September 2002
    Vero Beach, FL, USA
    Thanked 50 Times in 30 Posts


    I'm pretty sure John and Brian are working on this apart from what we're doing here.

    You need to read the other threads on this subject.


  7. #67
    TheCPA's Avatar
    TheCPA is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Thanked 351 Times in 167 Posts


    The IGC has had lobbyists retained for several years, and Sporting Bet has also retained a Firm now as well.

    I've heard thru the vine that there are others that have Lobbyists in the fold on this too, but I'm not 100% who they are, or if that's even true.
    The more the merrier as far as I'm concerned! One for every Senator!

    Every vote always counts in any voting process, but when there's only about 100 of them that matter, THEY REALLY count big!

  8. #68
    TheCPA's Avatar
    TheCPA is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    December 1969
    Thanked 351 Times in 167 Posts


    I just got this update from Poker Players Alliance for those who haven't joined them yet, here it is.

    Dear Members,

    Thank you for speaking out with letters and phone calls and telling your elected
    officials that your right to play poker is important and should not be restricted
    by overreaching federal legislation.

    Bills are still moving in both the House and the Senate, but with your help
    Senator Jon Kyl's attempt to attach his bill to lobby reform legislation has been
    slowed down. We are still in this fight.

    In the House, Rep. Leach's bill passed out of Committee on March 15th, yet it is
    unclear when it will be voted on by the full House. You will be pleased to know
    that the Poker Players Alliance was on Capitol Hill fighting for your rights.
    Please see the Reuters story below in which the PPA highlights the hypocrisy of
    Rep. Leach's bill. To see our full statement, visit the press release section of
    the Web site,

    Again, thank you for your continued support and if you have not done so already
    call your Congressman and Senators and tell them to oppose any bill that limits
    your rights to play poker.


    Michael Bolcerek
    President, Poker Players Alliance

    House panel clears anti-Internet gambling bill
    Wednesday, March 15, 2006; 12:46 PM

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. House committee on Wednesday approved a bill aimed at
    stamping out the $12 billion Internet gambling industry by stopping businesses from
    accepting credit cards and other forms of payment. The bill, cleared by voice vote
    in the House Financial Services Committee, would prohibit a gambling business from
    accepting credit cards, checks, wire transfers and electronic funds transfers in
    illegal gambling transactions. Unlawful gambling, under the legislation, would
    include placing bets on online poker sites, for example, and any other online wager
    made or received in a place where such a bet is illegal under federal or state law.
    By making it illegal to accept payments from people who live where federal or state
    law prohibits wagering, the legislation would impact offshore gambling Web sites
    used by many Americans to place bets.

    The legislation carves out some exceptions, including wagering on horse races, governed
    under another U.S. law, and fantasy sports. The bill now moves to the House floor for
    consideration. Major professional sports organizations supported the legislation,
    including the National Football League and Major League Baseball, saying in a joint
    statement that sports betting "threatens the integrity of our respective sports."
    But Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank, the top Democrat on the House
    committee, opposed the bill. He said Congress should not seek to control how adults
    spend their money just because some lawmakers oppose gambling. "Adults are entitled to
    do with their money what they want to do," he said. A group called the Poker Players
    Alliance opposed the legislation as well. "It is disingenuous to oppose Internet
    gambling and then write a bill that makes select forms of online gambling legal," said
    Michael Bolcerek, president of the group.

    U.S. efforts to outlaw Internet gambling also have been opposed by the Caribbean state
    of Antigua, which has been trying to build up its Internet gambling industry as a way
    to make up for sharply declining tourism revenue.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts