Some Info about Choice poker

[crazy canuck]

I don't know what you're looking for wake up call, but one guy reported online poker winnings in a state where online poker is illegal and he was tried and convicted (no jail time or fines tho).

[daveymck]

And heres me in europe with us being fed the bull that the US is the land of the free, its all barmy.

Adults should be free to do any activity that does not hurt others, online poker does not hurt anyone I just cant understand some of the draconian laws and paranoia in the US on this issue.

If many of its citizens are performing an activity then their government should be looking to protect them and minors getting access, they should be working with the casiono/poker providers not driving them offshore. They might even get some taxes then.

I have stated the UK governments position (and proposals) in other threads its one area where I am pleased we are doing our own thing and not blindly following the american way.

Before all you US guys come down on me I am pro american spent three happy weeks over there a few years ago, nice friendly people in the main and look forward to coming back (I even watch American Football), however your government and corporations are somthing I have real concearns about.

[Lori]

And heres me in europe with us being fed the bull that the US is the land of the free, its all barmy.

Wait till you see a poster get banned for being blatantly obscene/out of line (and you've seen what is allowed, so it has to be blatant) and then say that 2+2 should allow them to post what they want because they have free speech.
Those arguments have me in hysterics every time.

Lori

[MS Sunshine]

"however your government and corporations are somthing I have real concearns about."

You're not the only one with concerns.

MS Sunshine

[gabyyyyy]

Yes, because we all know that the 5th circuit court is the only court operating in the United States.

[gabyyyyy]

"Do you think the World Poker Tour owners are criminals because they work with Party Poker to show a tournament on TV ?) "

You are comparing apples to oranges. An advertisor is in a clearly different position, then the owner of the poker site.

[gabyyyyy]

"The argument that a poker game is not a banked game, therefore is not in the business of making or accepting wagers is also a valid one, even beyond the Circuit Court's ruling"

Right, no bets or wagers occur in online poker. Are you kidding me? Party poker must work for free then.

If a poker player is not betting or wagering, what the hell are they actually doing? This I have got to hear.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
"The argument that a poker game is not a banked game, therefore is not in the business of making or accepting wagers is also a valid one, even beyond the Circuit Court's ruling"

Right, no bets or wagers occur in online poker. Are you kidding me? Party poker must work for free then.

If a poker player is not betting or wagering, what the hell are they actually doing? This I have got to hear.



[/ QUOTE ]

Earth to gabbyyyyy, come in gabbyyyy.

A "banked" game is one in which the house has a direct stake; i.e. they accept the player's wager, and then either win and keep the money, or lose and pay the player back.

Now, other than propoker, tell me one site where they actually lose money to you when you have the winning hand.

Now please, go back to bugging your mom to let you drive her car so you can get the hell off these forums.

[Ted Geisel]

Well, Gabyyy, first of all, it is THE only Federal Court of Appeals to rule on the issue AND I believe the United States Supreme Court, which you might have heard of, declined the opportunity to overturn the Fifth Circuit decision, leaving the Mastercard ruling as the LAW for the Fifth Circuit.

(Had the US Supreme Court agreed with Gabyyy, it might have taken up the Fifth Circuit decision on cert, but it declined. Nice try Gabyyyy, admit it, you are wrong re poker. A Federal Court of Appeals ruled directly against your position and no federal court has sided with you on this issue.)

[Ted Geisel]

Try looking at the history and legalization of poker in California to understand the difference between a banked game, where the house "accepts or makes wagers, and the non-banked games, like poker, where the Players are the ones making and accepting wagers .... Don't the terms "Bet, call, raise, fold" ring a bell ? Does the House utter ANY of them ??? No, the Players do. It is the Players who are making or accepting or declining wagers, not the House.

Anyway, even if you don't agree, the Fifth Circuit decision in the Mastercard Internet Gambling Litigation, already DIRECTLY said your quoted language did not cover non-sports internet gambling.

But, you won't bother to actually READ that precedent because you KNOW the answer already.