If the United States eventually passes the Barney Frank law which I assume they will by atleast this time next year I just wonder if all or even most of the online casinos will abide by the ruling if certain sports leagues decides to opt out of allowing bets to be placed on there individual leagues. Personally I hope not I'd much rather leave things as they are now atleast we can bet on sports which is the only thing that I like to do anyways. I don't like my chances playing online casino games, besides you can play casino games at any casino in the country, I believe it's the sports betting that brings the people to the online casinos. The one major advantage that I do like about the law being passed is that Neteller would be back in business and that means speedy payouts. Overall all I believe it is a good proposition by Mr. Frank its about time that someone in congress came to there senses I just dont like sports league opt out.
-
-
Just to follow up on my post I personally think that alot of the online casinos will go along with what the law states even if that means allowing certain leagues to opt out if thats what they decide to do just to be 100% legitimate but the real big winners could very well be the casinos that allow sports betting even if a league opts out because thats what the people want anyways atleast I do. I just cant see David Stern, Roger Goodell, Bud Selig, or Myles Brand allowing there leagues to have sports betting if you leave them an option out. To them that would be bad "PR" and as soon as one of them decides to opt out you better believe the others will follow and thats just not good.Comment -
A dream too good to be true?
I think this is a link to what the law is trying to do:
I doubt the law will pass because there are too many pitfalls for politicians who would be seen as supporting the "evils" of gambling, and enforcing such legislation would be difficult because the books are not located under US jurisdiction. I do agree that on-line casinos are a bit questionable (I even have a hard time believing what happens on the flop on many poker sites), the main draw to the internet is sportsbetting. If the United States government really understands and want to properly regulate and tax on-line sportsbetting it should allow sportsbooks to set up shop where it is currently legal to bet on sports - Las Vegas (or even a potential sportsbook state Delaware). In Vegas (or Delaware) the government could sell licenses to operate the on-line book, regulate the book, tax the book and I as a bettor would feel more comfortable signing up to place bets there. Unfortunately the Vegas lobbyists, organized crime elements and moral hypocrites would stop that as well.Comment -
Hmmmm...........
looking at this FAQ:
-----------------
Is it possible for restrictions to be enforced if individual states decide to “opt-out” from permitting persons in their states from Internet gambling?
Yes. In using the Internet, a customer’s IP address is broadcast to the operator, which can then be used to identify the state in which a customer resides with a 99 percent level of accuracy. This information is also made available and compared to the customer’s registration information. In the event the information differs, the transaction is not approved and the customer is prevented from engaging in Internet gambling.
------------------------------
I think I have a serious problem with that FAQ statement, and my sportsbook taking any actions against restricting states that "opt-out".
It seems that the more people want to throw legislation at on-line sportsbetting the more messed up things get. I guess I just yearn for the good old days when the US government was too ignorant to do anything about it.Comment -
Gambling is pure evil,it will destroy you, thats the way these people think.Comment -
I love to gamble, but try to gamble responsibly. Gambling is something that has the potential to destroy your life (as anything addictive is), but if you understand your limits it is a highly enjoyable form of recreation.
What the US government wants to do is control how you gamble, and the internet is something the US govt has no handle on right now because the Net has exploded beyond its borders. How in the world does the US Govt expect to regulate, control, collect taxes and sell licenses to a book in Costa Rica or London, England is beyond me.Comment -
Uh-huh. Except when there's money involved -- states don't want to raise taxes, so they create lotteries instead (which are basically taxes on people who can't do math). And the federal government doesn't want to pay to help the indians (fine, the native Americans), so it forces states to allow tribes to create casinos instead.
Yep, gambling's evil -- but a sometimes-necessary evil. If we could figure out a way to make it so that the fed profited big from online gambling, it would pass smoothly.
I know -- how about a federal-owned monopoly on online bookmaking. Can you imagine the USPS running your book?Comment -
Yes, and not make the politician sponsoring the bill look like they are supporting gambling in any way.
Thinking about it, even if the Feds allowed on-line gambling, the individual states would have a say if it was allowed in their state. The "opt-out" clause in the Frank gambling enforcement regs, makes that a problem that many on-line bettors would object to.Comment
