The sad results of prohibition.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you are right.

To me, it lumped in all forms of poker (online and B&M) that are limited.

[/ QUOTE ]

To the gov't just can't stop the popularity of poker. Be it on-line or live.

Word in NY is there are people who want to re-do the Catskills to add gaming, but Donald Trump will not let it happen.

Everytime the gov't has tried prohibition it has lead to higher prices for citizens, more crime -- not less, and sadly a lot of deaths.

Given the number of players and the amount of money, the gov't will eventually get it. Sadly more people will likely to die before it happens.

I don't know how much new money is deposited on-line in gaming, but Congress passed a tax, now being collected by off-shore middle men. It has to be at least a couple of billion a year.

What a way to run a country.


D$D

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The original post certainly implied there is a link

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that D$D was referring to the general prohibitionist stance against gambling in the US (ie illegal in the majority of locals, or severely restricted, $5 bj hands at local bars).

This results in underground games with sketchy security and large piles of cash and hence incidents like the one mentioned in the article.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking at it again, I have to agree with LFrog- I misinterpreted D$D's post title.
(and after I mixed it up with Skall about making assumptions.... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] )

My apologies, D$D


However, I still say that, legal or not, it doesn't change anything. Not everyone is going to play in monitored clubs, and this kind of thing can and probably will happen regardless of the laws.

Making poker illegal DOES make it harder to present a risky front to potential criminals, unfortunately....

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The original post certainly implied there is a link

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that D$D was referring to the general prohibitionist stance against gambling in the US (ie illegal in the majority of locals, or severely restricted, $5 bj hands at local bars).

This results in underground games with sketchy security and large piles of cash and hence incidents like the one mentioned in the article.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking at it again, I have to agree with LFrog- I misinterpreted D$D's post title.
(and after I mixed it up with Skall about making assumptions.... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] )

My apologies, D$D


However, I still say that, legal or not, it doesn't change anything. Not everyone is going to play in monitored clubs, and this kind of thing can and probably will happen regardless of the laws.

Making poker illegal DOES make it harder to present a risky front to potential criminals, unfortunately....

[/ QUOTE ]

Not a problem. I'm used to getting yelled at, the net is pretty mild.

But over all without the prohibition people would be less likely to play in underground games, the same way there were no speakeasies.

IMO Frank DeSena's adopted son, fatherless again, who Frank as a parent had decided to stay home with to help with the child's education deserves a college fund in his father's name. IMO "we" poker players could make that happen. A few well ogranized charity events similar to "Put a Bad Beat on Cancer", would make this 16 year old's life much easier.


D$D

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
But over all without the prohibition people would be less likely to play in underground games, the same way there were no speakeasies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, to be clear- this can, and does, happen in "non-underground" games (as in, games that are not at risk of being broken up over legality). Whether undeground games exist or not has little to do as to whether people are going to try to rob poker games.

I think it's the amount of money involved, much more than the legality (illegal = less likely for people to involve the law, being the presumed logic behind that thought) of the games robbed, that encourages crime. That, and the amount of uncontrolled exposure.


To return to your analogy- speakeasies and moonshine still exist, and are used, even today.

[4_2_it]

This event is tragic, however I can't see how having this in the NYT helps our cause:

[ QUOTE ]
“He was one of these people who were interested in games of chance ,” said a former landlord, who knew Mr. DeSena and his wife, Kristine, when they lived on the Upper West Side some years ago. A brother-in-law of Mr. DeSena’s said he used to compete in tournaments.

But both said they were surprised that Mr. DeSena, a gentle husband and the father of a teenage son, had been involved in the shadowy, sometimes dangerous world of poker games , where locations are spread by word of mouth and e-mail.



[/ QUOTE ]
(emphais added)

Well, at least we know that the NYT is not one of friends in the fight.

[rando]

[ QUOTE ]
the shadowy, sometimes dangerous world of poker games , where locations are spread by word of mouth and e-mail.

[/ QUOTE ]

My goodness, this sounds just like the live games I am involved with. Gaaaassssppp!!!

But seriously, the media spins everything so as to maximize readership. If only the groupthinkers would one day understand this, society would be fine.

[Skallagrim]

Prohibition didnt cause this tragic incident. But it sure helped.

Greed and inhumanity are the root cause, but a poker game was chosen as the target because prohibition makes anything that goes "underground" an easier target. The thieves/killers know that there is money in a place less likely to be well protected (because obvious and effective security would draw attention) and certainly less likely to call the cops when hit.

Skallagrim

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Prohibition didnt cause this tragic incident. But it sure helped.

Greed and inhumanity are the root cause, but a poker game was chosen as the target because prohibition makes anything that goes "underground" an easier target. The thieves/killers know that there is money in a place less likely to be well protected (because obvious and effective security would draw attention) and certainly less likely to call the cops when hit.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the reports claimed some of the local operators do not charge a rake but an hourly rental, like pool hall.

There were also a couple of mentions of daily freerolls with cash prizes.

This was a man who enjoyed playing poker from time to time, going to Foxwoods, and once even entering the WSOP. He was not trying to make a living playing poker nor anything even remotely close to a compuslive gambler.

55, married 22 years to the same woman, college teacher, both worked until their adopted son was having trouble in high school.

I'm sorry but this guy was about my age, had been married a little longer, and I too have a 16 year old son. He got killed because the various governments both State and Federal, insist he has to drive or fly across an imaginary line to enjoy a few hours playing a game we all love.

No the State didn't pull the trigger, from the reports one of the armed robbers did while trying to pick up a dropped shotgun with one hand and discharged a handgun in his other.

Now I wouldn't claim the shotgun at fault either.

But this game was hit because poker is popular and this band of robbers graduated up from 7-11's or some other ready target.

The fact remains the only reason this guy was killed was he enjoyed playing poker occasionally and was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

IMO it could happen to any of us at almost any time.

You only play on-line?

Fine where is your protection there?

Poker site cheats, you hope a willing group of dedicated 2+2er's is there to find it to enough satisfaction to save you and hope the site does the right thing.

After the regulations you hope the new crop of more expensive e-wallets don't rip you off. If they do the worst that will happen is they will go under.

Prohibition may not be the direct cause, the "unsafe gun owner" was.

Anyone willing to discuss the idea of raising a little money for his adopted son or just bitching over words as usual.


D$D