creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
David Harsanyi
David Harsanyi
10 Oct 2014
Stop Calling It Marriage Equality

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected gay marriage appeals from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin,… Read More.

3 Oct 2014
Please Don't Vote

Most Americans don't really care about contemporary political issues or the rudimentary workings of their government.… Read More.

26 Sep 2014
Obama Goes Rogue

Of the countless lessons we've learned from liberals over the past few years, none is more critical than this:… Read More.

Ante Up Against Government Intrusion

Comment

Not long ago, a district judge in Colorado declared that poker is a game of "gambling" rather than "skill" because "while poker ... might involve some skill, these games certainly are contingent 'in part' upon chance, and when, as here, the games involve risking a thing of value for gain, they constitute a form of gambling."

Guess what? Nearly everything we do in life depends "in part" on "chance." So we might as well think of our entire existence as one colossal game of craps — with government as the hairy-knuckled, silk-suited mobster calling in the "vig" (whatever the heck that is).

And if poker were primarily a game of chance — rather than skill — probability dictates that I would have won a decent pot once in my stinking lifetime. I have not.

For me, then, no supplementary evidence is needed to recognize poker as a game of logic, deftness and deception, with only a sprinkling of luck. But if you're interested, there are reams of studies, law journal articles and mathematical equations proving poker's rightful place among skill games.

All of this is important why? Well, across the nation, poker players are mounting legal challenges using the "skill" defense in hopes of defining poker as a non-gambling game — both online and in real life.

To begin with, it seems impractical and rather silly for government to decide what games we can play. Chance or no chance, it is un-American (to pinch a phrase from Madam Speaker) for the police to raid suburban restaurants and pubs so they can weed out the debauchery of low-stakes Texas Hold 'em. Yet that kind of raid is not as rare as you may think.

And how many rational Americans believe that federal diktats on computer gaming are reasonable intrusions into the privacy of citizens?

Since 2006, Republicans — who acted like a gaggle of hand-wringing Carrie Nations — have been pushing a clampdown on Internet gambling, sponsoring legislation to make it illegal for banks and credit card companies to process payments of gambling operations.

The Justice Department has frozen or confiscated $34 million belonging to players who have a talent to take it from schnooks like me.

We all know the cliché about the two certainties of life. One of these certainties can be affixed to poker gamers, making a once-underground activity a government boon.

The other certainty of life is made immeasurably more bearable by occasionally indulging in pleasurable activities, which, for some, happens to include playing poker on a computer for money.

After all, when it's convenient, Republicans argue that Americans have entirely too much government interference in their daily lives. Here they have an opportunity to shed a thin layer of hypocrisy by supporting legislation that allows citizens to indulge in an activity they enjoy in the privacy of their own homes.

One such bill, offered by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., currently has more than 50 co-signers (a few Republicans).

In the Senate, Robert Menendez, D-N.J., recently introduced the Internet Poker and Games of Skill Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act (not surprisingly, government has the ability to make playing cards sound like a joyless bureaucratic mess), which stipulates that poker "is part of the cultural and recreational fabric of the United States" and should be legalized.

Now, I will concede that simply because an activity is part of the cultural and recreational fabric of the nation does not necessarily mean that we have a patriotic duty to legalize it, or pot, prostitution and Ponzi schemes already would be on the legislative docket.

One thing at a time.

David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Denver Post and the author of "Nanny State." Visit his Web site at www.DavidHarsanyi.com. To find out more about David Harsanyi and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 THE DENVER POST

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM



Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
There are some that feel gambling is morally wrong and irresponsible, they also feel that because of this, the government should prevent or punish people for taking part in these activities. Anyone that feels this way might as well just take the constitution and put it into a shredder and let the government tell them how to think and live and die.
I strongly support the right of free people to do with their hard earned money as they see fit. Gambling as are many other things such as smoking pot or drinking alcohol is ultimately a matter of personal choice. As long as I am not forced to underwrite their losses, it is none of my or the governments business what gamblers do with their time and money.
It is too bad I wasn't given the option of whether to support the gambling by AIG or the banks that foolishly leveraged themselves into a position of insolvency and is using my money to do the same thing that they did before the crash and burn. It's too bad I had no choice but to underwrite their losses with my tax dollars.
Comment: #1
Posted by:
Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:18 PM
Government intrusion into the Internet poker issue is not about limiting personal freedoms. It is only about the government's present inability to tax Internet gambling. Once they pass the taxation of amounts wagered (not amounts won) the government's objection to gambling of any form will vanish.

Will Rosegay
Comment: #2
Posted by: Will Rosegay
Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:06 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
David Harsanyi
Oct. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 27 Oct 2014
Lawrence Kudlow
Lawrence KudlowUpdated 25 Oct 2014
diane dimond
Diane DimondUpdated 25 Oct 2014

19 Mar 2009 Burn Before Reading

14 Jul 2008 Blame Senators, Not Oil Execs

14 Jan 2010 I Forgive You, Mark