Thanks. I'm already on that as well.

I have a concern that Im curious how you would address.

Personally I dont want the govt. of my state to implement a law stating I can play online poker.

If a law like this is passed I dont see it being good in the long run.

We would win the right to chose to play poker. But now the state is making laws about our choices. This sets a precedence that shows the govt. is the one who chooses what our choices should be.

To me it would make the lawmakers think that choice is not a right of the citizens and it is up to them to decide if we are allowed to have choice on certain subjects.

With laws like this passing which give you the freedom of choice it just seems that we are losing the freedom of choice as a whole. (Although gaining it in a small area).

Im a firm believer that there should not be a law stating that I have the right to play poker or I dont have the right to play poker. It is not something I feel my government should be deciding.

I love the right to play poker but I dont think I will ever vote for a bill that would create a law giving me the right to play poker online.

To me this doesnt seem like something that needs to be legislated either way. It should be a given right that if I want to play online poker Im allowed to. It should not require a law or amendment to the state constitution to allow me this right. Doing so gives the govt. more power by allowing them to decide what choices Im allowed to have and what choices Im not allowed to have. And IMO the government shouldn't have that much power.

It was really hard for me to convey what I feel Ive gone back and edited it multiple times. I hope Im clear enough about my concerns that someone can clearly criticize what Im attempting to say.

I dont want to give up my freedom of choice as a whole to gain the freedom to play poker online.

I certainly agree with you in principle, Jason. However, in Florida live poker is a licensed and regulated activity under the gambling laws of the state. It is unrealistic to believe that there will not be legislation passed for the same for online poker. If we don't get behind the effort to pass legislation which gives us open access to both in-state and out-of-state online poker rooms, the chances are that we will end up with only the choice to play in-state online poker legally.

In addition, under the implementation of the UIGEA, our access to online poker will remain dicey. If there is clear legislation making it legal to play online poker in Florida, there will no longer be any question that the UIGEA does not apply here.

Take a look at my Florida Ballot Initiative. This is what I would like to see passed in Florida.

So if in principle Im right a ballot like you want to add would be wrong "in principle."

So is this a case where 2 wrongs make a right?

Dont missunderstand me Im emailing my senators and representatives on a more than weekly basis in regards to getting UIGEA repealed.

But I think showing our government that we the people hold the power and not them is the right way to go about it. I dont believe giving them more power is what we need to do.

I understand what you are trying to do but Im just letting you know that you may not have the backing of the entire poker community. I think increasing our effort in getting bad laws removed is a better way to handle these issues than adding more laws or amendments to our state. The more laws we have the more power our govt. has its that simple. The more power our govt has the harder it will be to get crappy laws like UIGEA repealed in the future.

This just seems like a case where we may win the battle and lose the war. I guess its really sad that I can compare interacting w/ my government with war.

Haven't you noticed? We already lost the war. The only thing left to us is to fight and win individual battles.

Sorry but the day I believe that is the day I pack my **** and leave.

Right now people are voting for whomever claims they will give them more free crap. And a government that has the power to give you everything you want also has the power to take everything you have.

But the only reason I still live here instead of in a small shack in the Bahamas is I have faith that that one day the mass public will understand this word TINSTAAFL

There
Is
No
Such
Thing
As
A
Free
Lunch

Ron Paul's son Rand is running for the Senate in Kentucky. When asked about this issue in an interview with Liberty Maven, he said nothing supportive about our right to play. Rather, he said he'd oppose any legislation that taxes online poker (similar to your position).

The interview is at: http://libertymaven.com/2009/08/19/r...rty-maven/6911 . Here's the quote:

My letter to Rand Paul in response:

Dear Dr. Paul,

As a Kentuckian, a liberty lover, and a proud supporter of Rep. Ron Paul, I am writing regarding your August 19th interview with Liberty Maven. Specifically, I am writing to ask you to reconsider your statement of opposition to legislation that licenses and regulates online poker pending in the Congress. After all, regulation is preferable – and more libertarian – than potential prohibition, which is why Rep. Ron Paul is cosponsoring it.

While I would personally love for the federal government and the Commonwealth to leave us alone and let us play, the fact is that Congress has consistently opposed this. The House has continually voted against unregulated, untaxed online poker and gaming by wide margins. This most recently happened in 2006, when we lost the HR 4411 vote 317-93. The Department of Justice has even started targeting our funds. At the state level, the Commonwealth is attempting to seize the domain names of 140 online poker and gaming sites.

It seems there is a less than 1% chance for federal and state recognition of unregulated, untaxed online poker, but perhaps a 50% chance of getting licensed and regulated online poker done. I realize some would expect Kentucky's poker players simply to give up on online poker, but I do not believe that would do anything to further the cause of liberty. In fact, a successful prohibition would be seen as a victory of statism over liberty, and would do nothing to preserve Internet freedom.

What's important to me is your support for my rights. Please respond to this letter and let me know if you will support my freedoms. I will be watching your actions on this issue closely. I hope that I, along with my over one million fellow Poker Players Alliance -- including over 13,000 in Kentucky -- can count on your support.

Thank you for your consideration.

In liberty,

Rich Muny
PPA KY State Director & Board Member

I understand what y'all are saying.

I was just trying to point out what I consider a major flaw. Many people may not agree with me but with how our government seems to be slowly slipping towards an oligarchy my principles regarding what I expect from a government that is supposed to be and could be the best republic in the world are really important to me.

In the words of Abraham Lincoln "Important principles may, and must, be inflexible."


The way I see it is if we create legislation to legalize poker we may be able to play poker but may still be slipping towards an oligarchy type govt. If we do not create legislation but we wind up losing the right to play poker then we lose.

The only guaranteed win, in my eyes, is not legislating the legality of online poker but also not legislating the illegality of online poker. That is the only way we can be assured that online poker is fine to play AND we the people are still in control of our government.


Now that is over I have one more quote. This one from Groucho Marx "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others."

Congress is power hungry. No doubt about that. Check out Federal online poker & gaming legislation history.

Update on this issue posted here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...-425-a-528191/