Well written petition against govt theft of freedom

www.angrypokerplayers.com

Unfortunately, that really isn't all that well written and is a bit off base or stretched or not explained well when it states that the government went after the people that use the site. Fact is, in a case like mine where I used these sites to make my living, I agree with the statement, but point is the government will not understand the statements in that petition as such and will have an immediate defensive response of "We didn't go after the citizens that use the sights."

That is not to discourage anyone to stop the fight, but to get the facts correct and make the arguments compelling.

I just don't think the "they're taking our freedom" argument is very persuasive. We didn't stop prohibition, because the nation all of a sudden moved towards more libertarian sensibilities (in fact in 1933, just the opposite was happening). People force stiff drug laws don't think they're encroaching on freedom any more than laws against theft or fraud.

Prohibition of internet poker is bad policy. The costs far outweigh the benefits. It's not a right I was born with, and couching it as such just isn't persuasive to anyone on the other side.

Not a freedom issue?

< It's not a right I was born with ...>

You were born with this right as you have every right unless specifically prohibited.

In 2006, Bill Frist disregarded the freedom and desires of the American people as shown in this passage from Wikipedia.

Bill Frist later was forced from office in disgrace.

<Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA)
At the last minute before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections in what politicos call a “midnight drop” Majority Leader Bill Frist inserted the otherwise unpassable "Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act" (UIGEA) clauses into the bigger unrelated Security and Accountability for Every Port (SAFE) Act. The SAFE Act itself was a late “must pass” bill, designed to safeguard ports from terrorist infiltration. [29] This act clearly opposed majority public opinion. In the Zogby International Poll 87% believe online gambling is a personal choice which should not be banned. The Wall Street Journal Poll showed 85% oppose government prohibition of online gambling.[30] The UIGEA became the basis for the massively unpopular government crackdown and domain name seizure of the worlds top three online poker sites dubbed "black Friday" on April 15, 2011.[31]>


Where did the American freedom fit into this action? Where is the outrage of the American people as the promise of freedom is broken again and again?

Also from Wikipedia, Bill Frist left office over charges that he took one million dollars from his campaign fund and illegally invested (gambled) it in the market. He lost and then attempted to cover it up.

This is the scumbag who pretended to be our moral compass while taking away our freedom and trashing the will of the people.

Additionally, in med school, he used to go to animal shelters and pretend to adopt cats as pets and then use them for medical experiments.

Again, where is the outrage?

I agree with this. It's a losing argument.

Last year in California, we had a vote to legalize marijuana. It lost, in large part, because the proponents kept making the absurd argument that since booze is legal, weed should be too. They also deemed getting stoned as their "right."

It also lost because a lot of the stoners couldn't get off their couches and actually cast a vote. LOL.

Given the reactions to my posts, sadly I must agree. We are truly lost.

I think you guys are just arguing about which way to open the syrup. You both want syrup on your pancakes, but you have different approaches of getting it there.

I agree with you bj that it should be your freedom to play, the government should have no say in it, and you should be morally outraged and feel betrayed and abandoned by your country (at least that's how I feel).

However, I also agree with Wags that the most likely to win arguments are the fiscal ones. These can be summarized as:
1) Money wasted trying to prevent it.
2) Money that can be made by regulating and taxing it.
3) Economic stimulus by having it legal - think advertising, magazines, television shows, software, books, coaching, and other supporting businesses.
4) Income Tax Revenue. Winners play taxes. Every time money moves around, the government takes their cut.
5) Unemployment. 50,000 people just lost their jobs. Good tax paying citizens are now welfare applicants.

Which argument is more ethically correct we can argue. Which argument is more likely to win is a lot harder to argue. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be making both arguments, but excluding the fiscal ones is a mistake.

Don't give up.

It's funny. All of this is true, but it isn't true that Bill Frist was forced from office in disgrace. I'm not sure where that myth comes from.

It depends on who you mean by "we." If you mean libertarians, surely, the answer has been yes for a long time. See the wikipedia entry for "Smoking Bans" for one recent example. Americans just don't care very much about the personal freedom of other people.

Fortunately, if by "we" you mean poker players, there is quite possibly a bright future. In D.C. (where you aren't allowed to smoke in any bar), they have just legalized internet poker and have a plan in place for implementation over the next year. And, of course, the senate majority leader Harry Reid and the same evil B&M casino dollars that supported Frist are now on our side pushing for legalization.

It is quite possible the best time for internet poker is ahead of us.