Gambling Is Bad (Unless It's A State Sponsored Lotto Or Involves Horses)

from the then-it's-fine? dept

As expected, our elected Congress folks have moved forward with their plans to "clarify" gambling laws, which will effectively outlaw playing online poker, even allowing the government to push ISPs to block access to gambling sites. Of course, if the similar law in Washington State is anything to go by, expect all sorts of perfectly legitimate sites to be forced offline. Once again, it seems unfair to put the burden here on ISPs to block these sites. If the gambling sites share servers with other perfectly legitimate sites, those will be taken offline as well. It's worth noting, of course, that the law carves out exceptions for state lotteries (gambling is good when the money goes the government, apparently) and horse racing... because... well, there's really no good reason for it, but apparently some Congress folks like to bet on the ponies. It's unlikely the bill will go anywhere as the Senate apparently doesn't care much about this issue, but it's yet another example of Congress gearing up for election season by tackling the "really important problems" facing our nation.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Raekwon, 12 Jul 2006 @ 6:46am

    Re:

    by Beavis on Jul 11th, 2006 @ 4:45pm may i suggest voting Libertarian (or any other third party) that to keep elect dumbassed demolicans and republicrats? we get what we desserve keeping these arseholes in office.

    You realize it takes 67,000 signatures on a petition in order for you to even be a candidate in a third party. Democrats and the GOP have no such regulation. Until our government changes it's viewpoints on the "haves" and "havenots". You will likely not see a 3rd Party President anytime in the near future. There's too many fanatical religious christians, rednecks, morons, and old people voting on merely one key topic. (ex: "I always vote Republican!", "Business owners should vote GOP!" , "I ain't votin for no damn hippies!" So if you think about it, the government gives you the right to "vote" for the president, but they only give you two candidates of thier choosing. It sure is a good thing there aren't Fiefdoms, serfs, and Lords anymore, Oh Wait! Rather than a Nobleman being "granted" title and ownership you get to choose between he and his cousin. Ah now that's better. I can vote for this guy who doesn't care about my interest or the other guy who feels the same way. Southpark said it best, "A giant douche, or a turd sandwich." All you can attempt to do is vote for the lesser of two evils, if you can tell the difference, that is.


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.