Question of the Day - 25 July 2018

With absolutely no way to verify whether the player is underage or not (the account could be in the name of someone of age but there is no current technology to positively identify a player, like retina scans or fingerprints might do in a different setting), and no real way to track and tax large winnings, this would explode on the launching pad. Our gummint would never approve it.

I would try online gambling if it were legal. I believe it would have to be regulated.

Until the money or a check can pop out of my computer (or other device) there is too much riding on it. Until I can get free drinks and great food , entertainment, and glitz ,we will continue to go to real casinos. Don't get me started on the underage, phony and addiction issues, please.

"No, because anything that happens online can be hacked, and I wouldn't trust gambling sites to secure their servers, neither from the North Koreans nor from themselves."

Would not want to see online gambling.  go to Shreveport a lot since it is closer to where I live. I see so many people who can't afford to gamble, (tattered clothes, unshaven, etc.) at the tables betting big, possible with their rent money.  What "saves" a lot of people is that gambling may not be convenient.  Often, it may take them some time to make a trip to a casino town to make their bets.  

If a making a bet is only a "smartphone call" away, then they can gamble all the time...not good.  

Also there are the obvious issues of verifying the age, and actual identity of the people making the bets.  This would be another area where identity thieves could have a field day.

I like to gamble, but in moderation, I would restrict gambling to casinos in limited/restricted cities where there is at least a minimum level of screening.  

I saw a quote a number of years ago which, in my opinion, hits it right on the head. "Gambling on line is like playing craps with dice with no numbers" "Someone" tells you what the result was. You have absolutely no way of knowing.

Can't vote or input comments unless you are a registered user and many readers who would like to vote are not registered.  Sigh, good webmasters are hard to find.  However I vote no, greed alone would drive sight owners to find ways to circumvent the regulations and rip their bettors off big time.  Human nature will always find a way to defeat regulations and really, who would enforce it and where would the money come from to enforce on line gambling when torrent sights have evaded international laws for decades.  Sorry, a can of worms you don't wan to open unless you are going fishing.

Could not vote even after logging in.  Your poll needs to be fixed.

That is what we need another office of government employees that will regulate on line gambling...NOT.  We know online gambling was corrupt and rigged in the past with back doors added by programmers. I have to agree with other comments about the problems that we can already foresee. 

This is just the poll preview for the actual poll that will run a week from today. We should have made that clearer. You can vote next week. 

i was involved in the full tilt poker scandal and the black friday shutdown having funds in my account @ftp frozen. after approx. 5 years i did get what was owed but i had to go through the dept of justice and the agency they put in charge to distribute funds after pokerstars bought out ftp. it was long and drawn out but persistence paid off. anyway, i had a blast on ftp and won hundreds and hundreds of dollars through freerolls and low buy in tourneys. loved that ftp had a great set of satellites allowing winners to earn their way into the wsop main event. bet there were several hundred players each year playing in the wsop having earned their way in through these types of low cost and often free satellites. it was good for poker, ftp and the players. course i don't want to bring up the payouts rec'd by many of the "name" players @ ftp and the scandal they were involved in. tsk tsk tsk but like we all know, money can do strange things to people. still i say yea to online gambling.

Yes, and I would play online for money if it was clearly legal.

Is this question a preview?  I am logged in and can't vote?

Anyways, I vote for it not to be legalized.  2 reasons.  I feel like having to travel to a different location (other than my home) to gamble helps me not go on tilt.  Secondly, I have issues with the online gaming providers being reputable. After I got screwed by FTP I have always been skeptical.  In a casino, if I win $1k playing BJ, I go to the cage and they pay me cold cash - online, no way...there is a delay and during that time they are hoping you cancel the withdraw and piss the money away. 

I was a regular player for a number of years on Poker Stars (still am with play money) when there were still ways to fund a real money account for US-based players. I never had any problems with Poker Stars, either with questionable games or paying me when I asked to be paid. I never tried Full Tilt. I did play on Party Poker for a little while, but I saw collusion happening, even in small stakes games like $1/$2 Limit hold'em, and complaints to administrators resulted in nothing being done about it. The right companies licensed and closely regulated to provide the games should not be a problem, so yes, I would like to be able to play for money while sitting in my living room again. 

I find it amazing that most of the negative reasons I see are the same reasons we saw when the question was "Should casinos be allowed outside Nevada and Atlantic City?" The country was going to be a sea of gambling addicts because people could go to casinos close to home. How did that work out? 

When you’re online and somewhat anonymous, it’s too easy for underage people to play and for nefarious individuals to find ways to cheat. Online poker should have taught us that. Teams would play $200 buy-in sit and go tournaments and bust out legit players, much like the Taj Mahal scene from the movie Rounders, except these people play together and know each other’s cards. 

I agree  with all the "no" voters and their reasons. As far as poker goes, there are too many ways to cheat there. You could get four or five friends at the same cash game and catch people i the crossfire. They could be in different locations around the country communicating their cards over the phone. If the money was big enough they could get 30,40 50 people or more involved in a group playing at different times. I know there's ways for them to find out if there's collusion if there are only a few players involved but when the numbers get that big, how can they keep track of that.

The only way they should do it is like the World Poker Tour. Tournament play only. Different membership levels depending on how much money you're willing to risk each month. And Kevin, they would tax your winnings before they sent you a check.