Played Poker With A White Supremacist Last Night

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Mr WT -
People grow up, they change, they realize they made mistakes in the past. Getting a tattoo that is offensive is a mistake that is not easy to change, its a red flag that there might be a problem but until there is an issue I generally just ignore it because it might just be a mistake from his past.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to assume that if someone I meet is covered in swastikas and other neo-nazi tattoos that they are what they are representing themselves to be. Choosing to ignore it and hope that he has "changed his evil ways" is no better than putting your head in the sand. I can state categorically that if someone of his description sat down at my table I'd rack up and leave, even if he was the biggest donator in the room. I fought against punks like these years ago when I was with the JDL and I have no interest in being in the same room.

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf u were a member of a terrorist organization? This thread is quickly becoming epic.

[/ QUOTE ]

The JDL was not a terrorist organization.

[/ QUOTE ]

O RLY?

"In 2004 congressional testimony, John S. Pistole, Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence for the Federal Bureau of Investigation described the JDL as "a known violent extremist Jewish Organization."



"In a 1986 study of domestic terrorism, the Department of Energy concluded: "For more than a decade, the Jewish Defense League (JDL) has been one of the most active terrorist groups in the United States....Since 1968, JDL operations have killed 7 persons and wounded at least 22. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Defense_League

You can go now.

[chucky]

JDL is probably Jewish Defense League. I dont think it qualifies as a terrorist organization. My interpretation of the word "fight" is that he used legal and pr tactics to bring negative pressure on anti-Semitic hate groups.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
JDL is probably Jewish Defense League. I dont think it qualifies as a terrorist organization. My interpretation of the word "fight" is that he used legal and pr tactics to bring negative pressure on anti-Semitic hate groups.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol no read my post

[supafrey]

A bunch of my family was killed by the Nazis while in their homes, even more on the battlefield. I still have no problem with quiet bigots giving me their money. Trying to control the world into fitting your specific level of subjective tolerance is pointless... stop wasting your time and energy trying to fix people that will never be fixed.

His money is just as good as any other, and if I'm sure I have an edge in the game, I'd be the guy beside this moron, screaming at the floors and nits to stfu and let him stay.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

However, both of these rather touchy situations have come up right here in vegas.

In the case of the cardcap, it was clearly not a pre third reich relic of gambling merchandise. The player was told to remove it or remove themselves, much to their annoyance.

It seems the monte carlo just let them play the night away, blissfully uncaring as long as that rake was going down the hole.

What I was most concerned with was whether a business exercising their right to do business (or not do business) with whomever they please for whatever reason they wish interferes with someones right to free speech. I think I've gathered that the answer to that is "no."

Most importantly, could he sue the company for violating his free speech rights if they kick him out just for displaying the tat(oos? I'm gathering the answer is again no. Please clarify if I'm wrong here.

Al

[Poshua]

[ QUOTE ]
Most importantly, could he sue the company for violating his free speech rights if they kick him out just for displaying the tat(oos? I'm gathering the answer is again no. Please clarify if I'm wrong here.

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

IANAL, but, no, he can't. "Free speech rights" under the First Amendment are rights to be free from government interference only. They do not guarantee anybody a right to say or display anything on somebody else's private property.

Businesses may generally reserve the right to refuse service to anybody, with specific exceptions. A casino couldn't kick somebody out for being black, for example. However, these laws would not prevent the casino from 86ing a player for having visible tattoos that it deemed inappropriate.

[supafrey]

[ QUOTE ]
However, both of these rather touchy situations have come up right here in vegas.

In the case of the cardcap, it was clearly not a pre third reich relic of gambling merchandise. The player was told to remove it or remove themselves, much to their annoyance.

It seems the monte carlo just let them play the night away, blissfully uncaring as long as that rake was going down the hole.

What I was most concerned with was whether a business exercising their right to do business (or not do business) with whomever they please for whatever reason they wish interferes with someones right to free speech. I think I've gathered that the answer to that is "no."

Most importantly, could he sue the company for violating his free speech rights if they kick him out just for displaying the tat(oos? I'm gathering the answer is again no. Please clarify if I'm wrong here.

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Charter rights are to protect you from the government, not individual people/businesses. The criminal law, business codes and civil suits cover the penalties when someone infringes on your wellbeing/discriminates against you.

[Overdrive]

Post deleted by *TT*

[Eponymous]

[ QUOTE ]
Leaving the table is fine, because afterall, it's your right. Expecting management to remove said player just because you are offended is not fine IMO. If it were, I'm sure we could find a reason to get everyone thrown out of a casino... so where do you draw the line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Asking management to remove them is not just because someone happens to find it offensive. It's beyond offensive to an individual's personal sensibilities. It is overtly offensive to the vast majority of society (and the casino's patrons) regardless of background, and it is very threatening. Casinos throw out people for much less offensive and threatening stuff. If someone keeps using the f-word toward someone, they throw them out because it's threatening and not conducive to the atmosphere they want in their casino. Someone wearing tattos that basically say all Jews and blacks should be killed is at least as threatening and much more offensive than using the f-word. If he came in wearing a t-shirt that said "LYNCH N-words", you think that it is unreasonable to have them leave? Far from it. His tattoos say the same thing and more.

[pocketpared]

Apparently airlines can ask you to leave for having big boobs.