Sign in to follow this  
Franky(OD)

Online Poker officially banned in the United States

43 posts in this topic

Oh you think my shit is completely wrong? How about some official statements from major online poker companies, and I'll throw in the World Sports Exchange to top it off. Note that the only major company that is even considering closing American accounts is Poker Stars, which is dependent on future legislation.

Please actually read these before blabbering about ignorance. If anything your understanding of this entire situation displays a very high level of ignorance of current events and the American justice system.

From Lee Jones, Poker Stars:

1. Your money is completely safe at Poker Stars. It's kept in a segregated account at one of the largest banks in Europe.

2. You do, and will, have 24/7 access to your account funds. You will always be able to get to your money.

3. We have not made a decision one way or another as regards closing our American accounts."

World Sports Exchange:We have absolutely no plans whatsoever of dropping any players. In short, it will be business as usual. WSEX.com and all its sister companies are legal and licensed businesses regulated by the Gaming Commission of Antigua and Barbuda. We are wholly located in Antigua and do no business or run any part of our operation on US soil.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has recognized the right of Antiguan companies to be in this business and has instructed the United States to stop trying to block US residents from playing at Antiguan operations.

Nothing in the bill criminalizes placing a bet or sending money to or receiving money from an offshore gambling business.

Bodog:

You should take comfort in knowing that Bodog.com is well situated to adapt to any change in the legislative environment. Bodog.com considers online gambling to be legal under international law and complies with the laws within all of its jurisdictions where it carries out its operations.

We would encourage you to consult a legal expert to ensure that you are properly informed about local, state and federal laws with respect to online gambling.

You may care to know that Bodog.com has been in business for more than 10 years and was the first online gambling operation licensed in Costa Rica. Bodog.com is now also licensed in Kahnawake and by the government of the United Kingdom.

UltimateBet:

We first want to assure you that UltimateBet's games are still available and that you can continue to enjoy the site as you always have. UltimateBet has offered its poker room since 2001, and is not located in the United States. UltimateBet is not going away as a result of this legislation.

Here at UltimateBet.com the management of player funds is held to the highest standard of a public company. 100% of player funds are deposited in a segregated account, at a top tier bank, the Royal Bank of Scotland in the United Kingdom. You can be assured that your funds are completely safe and secure and that you are welcome to play with or withdraw your funds at anytime as usual

The new law does not change the legality of playing online games. The law does not impact people who play games from their computers. Instead, the law focuses on the payment processing of unlawful Internet gaming.

Our strong belief is that poker is a game of skill and therefore is not encompassed by this law. As set forth in the user agreement, we furnish a gaming environment, and participants are eligible to access this environment for their enjoyment where legal to do so. We do not undertake to assess the legality of play in any particular case as our users may access us from around the world.

Poker.com:

As far as we are concerned our operations are 100% legal under international law and we follow all laws of the jurisdictions in which our operations reside. There will still be plenty of places toplay poker and the industry will adapt, evolve and survive.

Absolute Poker:

We want to assure you that Absolute Poker games are still available and that you can continue to enjoy the site as you always have. The new law does not change the legality of playing online games nor will make us close any US customer accounts. The law does not impact people who play games from their computers. Instead, the law focuses on the payment processing of unlawful Internet gaming and we can assure you that our operations are 100% legal.

Full Tilt Poker:In the short term, we assure you that your online experience at Full Tilt Poker will not change. You will still be able to deposit and withdraw money from the site using the same methods and payment processors you have always used, and your money will remain completely safe and secure. We cannot predict how the online poker experience may change in the future, but we do not expect any immediate impact from the legislation, as the banking industry has 270 days to implement new rules after the bill is signed.

It is also important to note that, once signed, the new legislation will not criminalize individuals for playing poker online. Instead, the bill will eventually attempt to prevent the transfer of funds to online gaming. As poker is a game of skill rather than pure chance, we hope that it will not be affected by this new bill. Speculation aside, however, we will continue to work closely with organizations like the Poker Player's Alliance to lobby for an exemption for online poker and for your right to play a truly American game from the privacy of your own home and computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case you didn't notice or just chose to ignore what i linked earlier. http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/April11/scheinbergetalindictmentpr.pdf That is the official press release from the Department of Justice. /yawn

EDIT: http://www.businessinsider.com/online-poker-players-get-their-money-back-2011-4 Like I said earlier the feds are going after the companies not the customers.

Edited by RuDeBoI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is simply this: you cannot run around assuming that online gambling is banned forever over one incident that hasn't even been concluded yet. To argue otherwise is simple, blatant ignorance. There was a huge fiasco over TPB a while back, and the same shit happened back then "OH NOEZ I CAN'T TORRENT ANYMORE." America, as much as they like to try, can't do shit outside their jurisdiction, unless it involves blowing people up.

As mentioned by these companies, once any/all legislation is put into place, they will abide by it and do their best to allow Americans to play online legally. There is nothing the US can do short of widespread internet filtering to stop people from gambling online.

The bank and wire fraud charges carry a possible sentence of up to 30 years in prison.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/online-poker-websites-fraud-2011-4#ixzz1JpGkFwoO

Whoop-de-doo. Please show me legislation where online gambling is illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they aren't closing accounts because we can still play their free games, and i'm not interested in playing any other crap ass poker website besides pokerstars because pokerstars is the only one that actually offers 100+ person tournaments and has a ton of players where you can win huge payouts only putting in a small amount of cash. and i said you were being ignorant because you wern't talking about just this online poker incident, but rather you were saying we americans complain about every little damn thing that ever happens and about how we take all these "luxuries" for granted, atleast live in america if your going to claim that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whenever I visit America I notice how many luxuries the majority of the population take for granted.

It's just an observation, not a generalization. I've lived in 8/10 provinces in Canada, and I've visited many states for extended periods of time (3-4 months at a time) so I did get to know the people pretty well. Anyways, I think it's better if we let the political crap run its course and then talk about the outcome. We can both agree that this is a load of bullshit so let's leave it at that. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha glad we can agree on that :thumbsup: , hopefully all the politics behind it doesn't take forever i need to satisfy my online gambling fix damnit and i'm no good at sports bets <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well that just kinked my plan of a 15 dollar buy in game tonight fuck you fbi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never played online poker for money maybe I'll give it a try sometime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasty to point the finger yes....This government wastes so much money on unnecessary ventures....the focus needs to be drawn back to this country and not on other countries. we over extend ourselves in international affairs spending money we do not have. So until they correct the very poor judgement in our spending then yes I will be very negative about the amount of tax this country applies to us. I am not a political genious and I do not follow it in anyway but it is easy to see that they spend too much money. The system needs to be corrected....

I can agree that going into Iraq in the first place was, especially in hindsight, a poor decision. That decision was, as we all know, made by the previous President, George W Bush. His administration is no longer in office now, however now that America has already gone in there, deposed it's leader, and messed the country up, it's not as simple as just pulling out and coming back home. Without establishing some order the country would fall into complete anarchy. Even if you set aside the countless amount of deaths and brutality that would cause amongst its populace, the individuals who would rise to power would do so through militaristic means, mostly with those same acts of brutality I described. It would be almost certain that someone as bad, or far worse, than Saddam Hussein would come to control the country. And it is precisely those kinds of actions that create terrorist groups.

Whether America should have invaded Iraq in the first place, is pretty questionable. However now that you did, it's something you have to see through to the end. And that is why your government has not pulled your army back in it's entirety.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the subject of online poker, I don't believe for a moment that American citizens will be permanently banned from playing online poker. Even without all the substantial evidence that Ancient has provided, you only need a basic understanding of international law and politics to know that the US can't prohibit it's citizens from playing online poker indefinitely. Quite simply the United States doesn't have jurisdiction over companies that are outside of it's country. Meaning they can't prosecute the companies for such crimes. What they *can* do is prosecute individuals currently in their country who may have some attachment to the company, if they find solid evidence that a crime has been committed. Which is more or less what they are doing. This can delay the operations of the online poker business, but even if the prosecutions are successful, the company itself can instate people to replace those that are lost, and adjust their methods so that they aren't skirting the laws in the same way anymore.

If the US was going to target any specific illegal actions online, they'd start with online piracy first, as that is most definitely illegal. But even websites like thepiratebay won't restrict access to Americans, even if the US outlaws it, because quite frankly they don't have to. As long as Switzerland, if that is where they are based, does not outlaw it, then the United States doesn't have jurisdiction to prosecute them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasty to point the finger yes....This government wastes so much money on unnecessary ventures....the focus needs to be drawn back to this country and not on other countries. we over extend ourselves in international affairs spending money we do not have. So until they correct the very poor judgement in our spending then yes I will be very negative about the amount of tax this country applies to us. I am not a political genious and I do not follow it in anyway but it is easy to see that they spend too much money. The system needs to be corrected....

I can agree that going into Iraq in the first place was, especially in hindsight, a poor decision. That decision was, as we all know, made by the previous President, George W Bush.

In my opinion this is an ignorant statement. We the people of the United states of America elect our president and other officials to run the government.

Saying that George W. Bush made the decision is NOT the truth. Don't get me wrong, George was by far one of the dumbest and worst presidents. However We the

people elected him and voted on any actions taken place, that is how our country is run. It was not just Bush and his administration that decided to go

to Iraq, it was proposed to congress and voted on by elected officials from each state whom can not make a decision unless they have the support from

their respectful states.

So when people say it was the President that did anything... really it's the people that allowed it to happen.

Just like the people forgot that the Government is for the people by the people not over the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Woden, you're absolutely right. Once a president is elected into office they are in NO WAY responsible for their own actions. In fact, the people should blame themselves for not having the ability to predict the future.

Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law.
The world is yet to see a large, fundamental, working example of direct democracy as of yet, with most examples being small and weak forms.

America is not a true democracy, therefore your statement is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Woden, you're absolutely right. Once a president is elected into office they are in NO WAY responsible for their own actions. In fact, the people should blame themselves for not having the ability to predict the future.

Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law.
The world is yet to see a large, fundamental, working example of direct democracy as of yet, with most examples being small and weak forms.

America is not a true democracy, therefore your statement is wrong.

I guess my statement was incomprehensible for you Ancient. The ignorance that exudes from your brain to your fingertips and typed in this post just shows that you are a silly Canadian

that can not grasp the over all message of my post. In no way did I say that the presidents are not responsible for actions they take. I stated the truth which is a fact here in AMERICA

that we vote on any actions taken as a country. Every state has representatives that act as the voice for that respective state and it goes all the way down to city/town officials

that carry the word and votes of the people to the next level all the way up to congress where the final vote is passed and action is taken or not taken. US citizens are just as responsible

as the President for any thing this country does.

America is not a true democracy because the people have let it go that way and given the government to much power over themselves (myself included). however my statement is not wrong.

You probably did not read the whole post I'm guessing. (I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't that ignorant.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if I structured my statement in a way that was too difficult for you to comprehend.

Aww look at you, trying to use my own sentences against me.

Yes, the people essentially decide what happens, however the public is pretty oblivious to how it is accomplished, and has little or no say in the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understood it the act of invading Iraq fell under the "Executive Orders" rights of the President. While the President may not dictate any legislation or orders to common citizens of the US without the approval of congress, he does have the right to issue orders to any people or groups under the employ of his governmental branch, which includes the Military, I believe. That is called an executive order.

Making decisions by votes through congress or council is a very fair system designed to maximize the rights of the common people, however the drawback of the system is that it takes a lot of time for decisions to be made, especially if there is a lot of controversy. In times of aggression, decisions need to be made very quickly, in order to be efficient. In recognizing this, your ancestors granted the president of America certain powers to operate the military without the need for congress' approval. Or at least, that's what I was led to believe. It's possible I may be partly mistaken, however the action of invading Iraq didn't strike me as something that went through the process of a decision by congress.

I doubt many people would have voted to elect George Bush as president if they had known he was going to invade Iraq, so the choice can hardly be pinned on the people. As well, the official reason for the invasion of Iraq, as cited by George Bush and Tony Blair, was because Saddam Hussein was violating his agreement to disarm all Weapons of Mass Destruction in his country, however the official intelligence report after the occupation of Iraq was that there weren't any WMD's found. If that didn't make the invasion a mistake, then I don't know what does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you dirty thread jackers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understood it the act of invading Iraq fell under the "Executive Orders" rights of the President. While the President may not dictate any legislation or orders to common citizens of the US without the approval of congress, he does have the right to issue orders to any people or groups under the employ of his governmental branch, which includes the Military, I believe. That is called an executive order.

This makes a lot of sense. In the military (Canadian, anyways), senior officers delegate their authority to their subordinates, and in times where a decision has to be made on the spot there is no time to go through the chain of command, so whoever is in charge makes the decision. When you're in a leadership position, you NEED to make a decision. It is almost always the case that making the "wrong" decision is better than making no decision at all.

Bush probably could have made a better decision, but he made one, and we all have to live with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The War Powers Act [established in 1973 after Vietnam] allows the President to use military forces for 60 days, without a formal declaration of war by Congress. It also grants an additional 30 days upon a formal request by the President, regardless of Congress's agreement with the request. So the president may wish to execute it, but as of 1973, the Congress must formally declare war.

On another note, the president isn't decided on by the people. It is voted on by the electoral college of the states.

Aren't we talking about poker?

Edited by Badboi(OD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking about the government banning poker, and one of the reasons suggested for their pressure on opposing online poker is that the government needs money, which brought up stuff that is draining your money. The subject of this topic was the choices the US government made in regards to online poker. Citing other good/bad choices the government has made is entirely related, especially when we're considering the credibility of the American Governments decisions.

Edited by Terra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this