Anti-Gambling Association Confused by Online Casino Ruling
Both Tom Grey of Stop Predatory Gambling and the reporter interviewing him for OneNewsNow are apparently confused by a recent court ruling concerning the UIGEA and online casinos, says a gaming expert. Online Casino Advisory senior gambling analyst Sherman Bradley says the two make several factual misrepresentations in the article, leading to more uncertainty about the legal status of online casinos and the effect of online gambling on problem gambling."The report begins with a simplification of the federal appeals court decision regarding the UIGEA last week that does not accurately describe the legal situation," says Bradley. "The ruling did not uphold any federal law prohibiting Internet gambling, as there is no such law. It upheld the right to ban Internet payments that involve gambling which is illegal under existing laws.
"Since the only federal laws against gambling have been found to apply only to sports betting, casino gambling and online poker rules would then be decided by individual state laws."
Grey also said land-based casinos want to repeal the UIGEA because they are losing money and want to operate without the costs of labor and capital investment a land-based operation requires. Yet Bradley asserts that a large portion of the land gambling industry opposes the competition of online casinos, and that if casinos are losing money, they must not be the evil money-sucking traps Grey fears.
Further, Grey says as much as $6 billion annually in government revenue is far less than the damage Internet gaming would do to problem gamblers. Yet, Bradley points out a multitude of scientific studies have found online gambling less compulsive and dangerous than land-based, and also found problem gambling figures remain constant with or without legal gambling access, tight or loose gaming laws.
"It's easy to understand Mr. Grey's anxiety, given the erroneous information he was given," says Bradley. "Hopefully he will sleep much more soundly now."
Recent Comments
| Posted by: Truthteller | When: 09/12/2009 08:33:35 AM EST |
| Bradley should check his facts because he has no idea what he is talking about. The following sentence is factually incorrect: "Since the only federal laws against gambling have been found to apply only to sports betting, casino gambling and online poker rules would then be decided by individual state laws." The illegal gambling business act (18 usc section 1955) is a federal statute that is in no way limited to sports betting and has been used many times to prosecute other types of illegal gambling, including poker. The false message that internet poker is not prohibited because federal law only prohibits sports betting various gambling statutes don't mention the internet is propaganda and stupid to anyone with a legal education. There is nothing unclear about the law. People making money off of illegal gambling on the internet saying the law is unclear doesn't make it so. Your remedy is to change the law if you can get the political support, but don't be dishonest about what the law actually says. | |
| Posted by: K. C. Carmichael | When: 09/12/2009 01:13:01 PM EST |
| Obviously, the Internet can be used to spread misinformation, as your comment proves. The Illegal Gambling Business Act, like the UIGEA under the recent ruling by the US Third Circuit Court of Appeals, does not make any gambling illegal per se, but rather reinforces penalties to be applied to gambling declared illegal by other statutes. This means that the only federal laws against gambling are the Wire Act of 1961 and the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992, both of which apply only to sports betting. In all other cases, state laws apply, and only six states have statutes against online gambling. If this displeases you, perhaps you should seek remedy by actually passing a law rather than wishing it were so. | |
