|
|
|
|
#2
08-20-2005, 06:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
Now if you'll excuse me I have to go home and put some water in Buck Nasty's mama's dish. [/ QUOTE ] classic! one of the funniest things ive ever seen in me entire life!... "she wear underwear with d*ck holes in them" "Look like a boot leg ice T"! 
|
|
#3
08-20-2005, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
You really should try to find out what that was about. Did you get the name(s) of your ejectors? Sure, they have a right to deny you service, but from a customer service perspective, they have an interest to keep people happy.
So, write them a letter or, if you're feeling frisky, call their head of security and ask why you were ejected. Were you 86'd or just asked to leave for the night? Regards, T
|
|
#4
08-20-2005, 11:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
JIHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD
|
|
#5
08-20-2005, 12:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
That's pretty outrageous. Let us know what comes of it. I certainly don't intend to patronize Harrah's if they treat patrons like this, but I'd imagine Corporate will be apologetic and probably give you lifetime comps to try to keep you from making a stink about it.
"This is their right as a private business" -- no, I'm pretty sure gaming is a public accomodation and falls under civil right law. I'm not a lawyer, etc.
|
|
#6
08-20-2005, 01:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
"This is their right as a private business" -- no, I'm pretty sure gaming is a public accomodation and falls under civil right law. I'm not a lawyer, etc. [/ QUOTE ] Nope, Gambling, at least in NV, is governed under the Right to Refuse Service Act which states that for ANY reason, a casino may refuse the action of a potential costomer. It would take balls the size of Clevland for them to walk up to the OP and say, "Get out, you look different than white people," but it wouldn't be against the law. Of course, Harrah's could just as easily kick you out and not tell you that it's for racial reasons, and that would fly just fine. For what it's worth, I have no proof that any casino has ever abused their power in such a way (though I find it hard to believe that one hasn't) nor do I side with the casino against the OP (so long as we got the whole story). Cody
|
|
#7
08-20-2005, 01:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
"This is their right as a private business" -- no, I'm pretty sure gaming is a public accomodation and falls under civil right law. I'm not a lawyer, etc. [/ QUOTE ] no, you're wrong. just because you add an IANAL disclaimer at the end doesnt excuse ignorance. they are a private business and are within their rights to refuse service or bar anyone of their choosing for whatever reason (ie: the same rules that allow casinos to bar card counters)
|
|
#8
08-20-2005, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "This is their right as a private business" -- no, I'm pretty sure gaming is a public accomodation and falls under civil right law. I'm not a lawyer, etc. [/ QUOTE ] no, you're wrong. just because you add an IANAL disclaimer at the end doesnt excuse ignorance. they are a private business and are within their rights to refuse service or bar anyone of their choosing for whatever reason (ie: the same rules that allow casinos to bar card counters) [/ QUOTE ] First of all, not all casinos can legally bar card counters. Apparently New Jersey casinos are prohibited by law from such bars (Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc, 1982). Secondly, "they are a private business" has nothing to do with it. The vehemence of your accusation of ignorance led me to look up some facts. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to Wikipedia, [ QUOTE ] Outlawed discrimination in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce; exempted private clubs without defining "private," thereby allowing a loophole. [/ QUOTE ] Since most of the Nevada casinos are large corporations engaged in interstate commerce, I don't see how they can excuse themselves from this law. Perhaps the casino part of the establishment is considered differently from the hotel part; if you're familiar with the case law in this regard, then you passed up a really good opportunity to cite it.
|
|
#9
08-20-2005, 05:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] "This is their right as a private business" -- no, I'm pretty sure gaming is a public accomodation and falls under civil right law. I'm not a lawyer, etc. [/ QUOTE ] no, you're wrong. just because you add an IANAL disclaimer at the end doesnt excuse ignorance. they are a private business and are within their rights to refuse service or bar anyone of their choosing for whatever reason (ie: the same rules that allow casinos to bar card counters) [/ QUOTE ] First of all, not all casinos can legally bar card counters. Apparently New Jersey casinos are prohibited by law from such bars (Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc, 1982). [/ QUOTE ] Wrong this stated that card counters couldnt be barred for cheating, but they can be barred for counting. Second parts almost right but gameing isnt a public ammodation, its just like aguasta (they dont let wenches in).
|
|
#10
08-20-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harrahs treated me like I\'m a potential terrorist tonight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] First of all, not all casinos can legally bar card counters. Apparently New Jersey casinos are prohibited by law from such bars (Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc, 1982). [/ QUOTE ] Wrong this stated that card counters couldnt be barred for cheating, but they can be barred for counting. [/ QUOTE ] Well, you seem to be familiar with it, but that's not at all what I found by browsing Google results. A UNLV Professor's site: [ QUOTE ] The state Supreme Court held, in Uston v. Resorts International Hotel Inc., 445 A.2d 370 (1982), that government control of blackjack was so complete that casinos in Atlantic City did not have the authority to decide whether skilled players could be barred. [/ QUOTE ] Some sort of law school resource: [ QUOTE ] Facts: The defendant excluded plaintiff from the blackjack tables in its casino because the plaintiff is an expert card counter. Issue: Can the defendant exclude the plaintiff from its casino just because the plaintiff is an expert card counter? Holding: No [/ QUOTE ] Again, you seem to have more background knowledge than I do, but I didn't find anything saying that the Uston case was about casinos barring cheaters. That said, not everything on the Net is a trustworthy source and there's a reason why you can't earn a law degree from 5 minutes of Web surfing, so I'll defer to your knowledge. That's interesting about the "public accomodation" part, though. Thanks for the info.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
