This.

The cops are actually a little behind the times. They should be confiscating phones, watches, and gift cards. These degens down here will sell anything to get that min buy.

Imo, this is what likely happened here. Police know that this illegal game of poker exists. Raid the game in order to seize all the cash from players under civil forfeiture which is now a major source of funds for police departments especially in smaller and mid sized cities. It is extremely difficult to fight civil forfeiture in the courts and most victims give up trying to get their assets back.

In other words gentlemen, they weren't there to conduct criminal justice, and slap some minor charges against a couple of guys. They were there to insure funding for next years budget would be met.

*Watches Bobo drop the mic*

*Applauds*

OP, whether you agree with a law or not, you are bound by it. That's the way laws work. If you play at an illegal poker game, police raids are a possibility that you have to accept. To expect any other reality borders on mental illness.
You don't have to agree with the laws surrounding poker and gambling, but if you break them, you have to accept you risk police action.

This type of "policing for profit" is unfortunately pretty common in America these days. The laws obviously need to be changed.

The first thing that needs to change is that law enforcement shouldn't get to keep any of the money or assets they seize. It's a pretty serious conflict of interests. It's bad at the local police force level. It's reached epic proportions with the DEA.

Just put a law in place where seized assets are automatically given to the educational system. These types of busts would disappear. The only reason cops do these kinds of raids is because they get to keep the cash. Poker home games are a crime without a victim, like most drug forfeiture cases.

By this logic the police have no say in who they arrest or decide on who to raid. I know this is not true and cops sometimes look the other way on certain things that are illegal. Jaywalking can be illegal but how many times have you seen cops charge people with it? Remember there have been many bad things in history where people were just following orders. It does not make it right.

Exactly. It's legalized armed robbery.

I've been staying at a sh*thole hotel in Vegas for a while. There's pimps that beat living cr*p out their whores on a daily basis. They get knocked unconscious once a week. The cops don't care about this because there's no money to be made. They just let these women get beat up, raped, and used.

Meanwhile, they'll hassle every bottom feeder selling 1/4's of marijuana because there is money in it. If they spend their time on the women-beating pimp, they get no extra money. If they spend their time on harmless drug dealers, they get extra money. Policing for profit.

Well, with all due respect-
you say that raked games are illegal, I say that they are not illegal.

Let me give you an illustration of why I say this:

Have you ever heard of anyone getting arrested for the crime of abortion? Of course not. But abortion IS a law. However, a higher authority overruled the law in Row vs. Wade. So is abortion against the law, or not? I would say that abortion is not against (mens) law. (obviously God's law is a different argument)

In the same way, the Supreme Court has ruled in every single state that every crime must have the element of standing (or subject matter jurisdiction) for a crime to have been committed. A victim must suffer a harm in the form of a net tangible loss for a crime to have been committed.

My question for anyone that thinks raked poker games are illegal- which victim suffered a net tangible loss, and what was that loss?

With all due respect, why?
Why is it ridiculous?

Well said, sir.

Here you go, Purvi Patel is currently serving 20 years for an abortion. Not that they can prove she had one, nor has it mattered that the charges are mutually exclusive.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...or-an-abortion

BTW, no tangible loss is required for your game to be illegal. It's illegal because it's a crime to rake a poker game without a gambling licence. You need to move on from your argument. You are wrong. The game are/were illegal, and the police action, while over the top and not in line with your priorities, is legal and supported by the law.
The tangible loss thing comes up in civil cases, where a party has committed negligence. The damaged party can only sue when something goes wrong, not when something has the potential to go wrong.

I don't see it that way. The way I see it, they labelled the funds in order to create a fake air of legitimacy for their theft. Which to me makes it even worse.

Why is it preposterous? The officers robbed people (imo). They should be arrested and prosecuted accordingly, just like any other criminal.


Of course it's a matter of opinion. All law is a matter of opinion, that's why we have lawyers and judges- to interpret the law.


The point is that clearly, the police were not operating in a capacity to protect or secure rights, which is supposed to be their jobs. (see The Declaration of Independence)
The law was not created to allow police to rob innocent citizens. This was an abuse of power. As such, I think those cops and the chief of police should be arrested and prosecuted.

disclaimer: I will mention once again that I do not advocate violence of any kind. Also, I'm not a member of law enforcement so I'm not in any position to arrest anyone, nor do I advocate for any 'campaign' 'petition' or anything of the like.

You see, this is the type of thing that really irks me. The guy that got arrested was not loud at all. Nor was he acting like a tough guy. He just didn't consent to his money getting stolen from him.

1. Do you believe that people should be arrested for the crime of abortion?
2. Do you believe that the supreme court is a higher authority than the lower courts?
3. You are totally wrong about the civil vs. criminal thing. Criminal cases are absolutely included in this. Here is some proof:
http://marcstevens.net/articles/stan...reference.html

1.) Nope, but some states have laws on the books that make it illegal. In those states, as much as I hate it, it's a crime.
2.) Yes.
3.) You link to a personal website where the writer has no legal training, no basis for the assertions he writes, and is an opinion that is not considered correct by the US legal system. That is not proof of your opinion. It's just someone else who agrees with you. That is not relevant. Provide me with a link to a supporting supreme court decision and I'm happy to change my stance, or provide a written legal opinion from a trained lawyer of good standing for the same effect. I don't think there is one though.

There is relevant case law in that link from every single states supreme court.
As to legal training, that guy has more of it than any lawyer I know.
Furthermore, it should be self evident that what he is saying (and what I'm saying) is true. Why? Again, look at the spirit of these laws, look at the stated purpose of government (to protect and secure rights), look at the JOBS of police- to protect and to serve.

Who were the police protecting when they raided the game?
Who were they serving?
What rights were they securing?
Who was the victim at the game?

Right, I'm done. You refuse to provide real evidence for your point, and keep making the same arguments when they have been proven to be patently false. You, sir, are wrong. I doubt you'll ever accept it, but you are.
Your use of sourcing is hilarious, and if I tried that as a writer, I'd be looking for a new career in very short order.
Your questions have no bearing on this at all. The host of the game was committing a crime, and the cash at the game was seized under asset forfeiture statutes. That is the entire situation from a legal point of view. We may disagree about the law, but there is no argument that it doesn't apply.
Good luck in the future and I hope you are more sensible if/when you are in a raided game.

Your outrage is understandable but your ability to view this event rationally is obviously impaired.

I defy you to prove that the law as you claim it applies to me at all. I can pretty much guarantee that you can't do it, as your only argument seems to be that 'this is the law because I say that it is'.

I would also dispute your classification of what happened. I believe that what happened from a legal point of view is that the police robbed a bunch of innocent people while trying to use their authority as a justification for their crime (yet operating outside of their authority).

Should a police officer who arrests a suspect and prevents the suspect from leaving jail be charged with kidnapping?

Police (with the people's (collective) consent) operate under a different set of laws than the general population.

I don't agree. If what you are saying is true, why don't the police issue speeding tickets for drivers going 1mph over the speed limit (speaking in general terms)?
Because the intent of the law is to keep people safe.

What misinterpretations? Please be specific.


Exactly. And that's my point. If no such laws exist, why would anyone assume that it's legal for police to steal money from innocent people's wallets?



From where I sit, stealing is stealing.

I do not accept that the event was illegal. Who was the victim and what harm did he or she suffer? What is the corpus dilecti of this crime?

I don't think we need an investigation to determine what so obviously and clearly happened- the police robbed innocent people.

Police do not operate under a different set of laws than the general population. Can you prove that they do?

How do you know if you weren't there? You shouldn't rely on 2nd hand opinions that may be biased. Stop with the stealing BS. They have every right to confiscate that money or they wouldn't have done it. Just like you wouldn't object to them taking money from someone selling drugs you shouldn't object to them taking money from people operating in an illegal gambling operation.

The scenario probably unfolded like this...

Cop: We are taking everyone's money please give us yours.

Guy: No

Cop: If you don't give us the money you will be arrested.

Guy: I'm not giving you my money so arrest me if you want.

Cop: Ok

OP I can understand that you are upset because all these guys are probably your friends or at least poker buddies but you're coming off as really ignorant and stupid. Comparing a poker game to abortion to corner stores? Please just stop. Whether you agree with it or not the fact is that it is illegal to rake a poker game with out a license. Saying you don't think it is illegal when in fact there is a piece of paper somewhere saying that it is just makes you look really stupid. I'm expecting you to tell us you're a sovereign citizen next and no laws apply to you, at least then your position would make sense.

Wrong. Please google civil forfeiture and report back to us.

People have the right to play poker but people don't have the right to rake a poker game with out a license. Seems pretty simple IMO.

I bet the guy running the game isn't even as upset as you are because unlike you he probably understands the law and the risk that comes with running an underground game.

Surely you are doing everything in your power daily to get these laws changed right? You wouldn't just bitch about something on the internet with out actually taking action, would you?

+1 to everything Howard has said. You're semi-delusional OP.

It's starting to make sense....

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...uffler-260269/

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...-forum-301504/

I would agree with your version of what happened. However, I don't come to the same conclusion as you do regarding the arrest. I would say that the guy was falsely arrested as it's not a crime to refuse to give thieves your money.

Yes, they are my friends and I've been friends with them a long time. I don't like watching my friends get robbed. In my opinion it is not illegal to rake a poker game. Again, you can't tell me on one hand that this type of law is there to protect people, yet on the other hand allow the government to rake 50+% on scratch tickets. This alone proves that the law does not apply.



A google search will never prove that stealing is lawful.

Why? Why don't they have the right to rake the game?

You can't be serious. It's a misdemeanor or a minor felony virtually everywhere in the USA to operate a raked game. Bad law? Sure it is! I don't blame you for being upset about a police raid on your game. But to deny that they have the law on their side is nonsense. Raked games are illegal by statute and are vulnerable to this kind of crap any time. That's why operators need to pay off the right people to continue without interference. Be as outraged by the situation as you want. Rave on if you want. But to not realize that the law is real is a bit goofy. After all your posts I suspect simple trolling is what you are doing here now.

lol 'murica. And they just keep wondering why the world keeps thinking it's a stupid country.