> So, uh, why's Lee a felon again?

Matt, you are so sweet and naive in your innocence. Lee is a felon because he benefitted $4,000 per year for two years. Benefit from gambling, direct or indirect, realized or unrealized, can get people into trouble with the law in Arizona! Unless you are an Indian. Then Arizona will will favor you with special laws that let you rake pots with impunity. Poor Matt, so far behind the 8-ball here has no choice but to resort to Palimaxism #1 "Lee is a felon". Ha. Lee has obtained ConvictAtLarge.com. What audicity hey? Alas Matt, your friend Felon Judge Lee can't find the codified SPS's you think some cardrooms may need to challenge either.

>And why do you need to lie to your customers, telling them that:
>"We are also excepted from illegal gambling under A.R.S. 13-3301(1)(d)(iii) and 13-3311 “Amusement Gambling”..."

The correct, unadulterated quote from the TTJ SPS (aka The Royal Flush Jan 2012 edition subtitled The Poker Memorandum of Understanding for the rest of us, is: "we believe that cooperatives CAN qualify as excepted from illegal gambling pursuant to 13-3301(d)(iii)"

A co-operative has no need to register as an amusement, although as the TTJ SPS PDF makes clear, if it wanted to, it could. And the PDF SPS explains quite clearly how and why:

http://www.TheTiltedJack.com/JanTRF2012.pdf




> So, poker is amusement gambling now?

Sigh. Poker -- and some cardrooms -- can be Amusement, can be Regulated, can be Social, can be a county fair, or historical society event, or special district event, or fund raising for qualified 501(c)s, or as a booster for colleges or to benefit a very specific type of pulminary research. Im sure there are other things poker, and cardrooms can be... And illegal is one of 'em, most certainly. But not if the cardroom pays their amusement license taxes on their button fees and all proceeds are returned to the players who all rwually own and operate the establishment... Oh wait, you wanted to know if poker was an amusement now... Here try this article on for size:

Millions Seized in Phoenix-Area Gambling Raid
"When you play poker, that's for amusement," Arpaio said Tuesday.

Source:
http://www.8newsnow.com/story/642704...-gambling-raid

> So, uh, why's Lee a felon again?

Illegal benefit, sheesh!

> You can benefit from amusement gambling, right?

Absolutely! i don't personally, but yes, pursuant to your beloved 13-3302, Amusement Gambling is.... Wait for it...






Not unlawful

Excellent!

But you are barking up the wrong tree matty. The Amusement exclusion might be an avenue worth pursuing for a cardroom operating to line a passive (or hell, even an active) ownership interest's pockets. In other words, 27 of the 28 cardooms operating in Maricopa County today might consider the Amusement Gambling registration option... Which gets us back to the other challenge issued earlier - the charity poker raffle tournament event that 99% of casino night fundraisers operate illegally by NOT properly registering or followi g the raffle guidelines, which, btw, in the unending clutter and conflict of your beloved ADG PDFs, conflict with the AG and Statutes with regard to a raffle being used to determine the winner (ADG) or not (AG Amusement) Fun fun.

Any more libel, misquotes, or personal attacks?

/bump

Apparently this was missed, or have gotten pretty far off track...

>Now your part of the challenge, if accepted, is to provide the ADG or State codified laws, rules or SPSs that override this Constitutional right we, as professional cardroom operators and players, contend we have by virtue of the State voluntarily regulating and thereby legitimizing Jackpot Poker, a non-banked card game, for Indian Citizens.

I'm dead serious Matt. Accept the challenge or please sit down, class is over.

So the other day i attended a signage variance hearing downtown... We wanna bigger marquee for our complex, passed no problem... But being downtown, I decided to swing over to the hornet's nest and request the following public information from the ADG:

- All executed Poker MoUs.

- All cease and desist orders served on tribal cardrooms from 1984 to 2003.

- Any and all corresponce regarding poker between the ADG and any of the following: AZ AG, AZ Governor, AIGA, NIGC, DOI, BIA, and individual tribes or their representatives.

These documents and the ongoing efforts to free professional poker from the unconstitutional (imo) State monopoly created by the Poker MOU, can be found soon on ICGPA.org, ConvictAtLarge.com and secretsocietyofcardroomoperatorsansplayers.com

We will probably see the entire record of the Ace High caselog, including court transcripts, in the Lee trial, and forthcoming appeal, made available for public disection and discussion.

Matt, et al.

Let you in on a little secret. About why I think I am a sole voice coming here to debate issues... Now that MrPoker has moved on to the bar and restaurant industry... Not only would a cooperative cardroom make for the devil of a prosecutor's nightmare (we all saw how the judicial responded to the State wasting so much time and money to prosecute Lee, who may prevail on appeal), but the State Attorney telling me personally after Lee's trial had concouded that "the squeakist wheel is next to get greased" is a clear case of flat out selective prosecution if there ever was one.

You can't arrest someone to "set an example". And you can't do to me what you get to do to Lee. You can't rake me over the coals and call me a liar or a felon or say what I do is illegal. You have no idea. Even though I have basically provided you with our poker manifesto - our complaints, our petition, our actions, and our words.

As I have the right of expression and freedom of speach too, ya know. And you can't poke me with a stick just because I am speaking out about my beliefs and opinions, especially when nobody else can or is willing too. I believe, perhaps errantly, that the moral high ground here affords me the luxury of exercising my 1st Amendment Right to protect my 14th Amendment Right.

Why not? Because I flat out dont benefit at all by any illegal gambling activity. Contrary to your assumptions and personal attacks or opinions stated as facts, or the topper, not once now but twice misquoting me and numerous libel issues... But still, i dont illegally benefit, so only my voice is heard. Too many cardrooms operate under the radar and on the thin hope that tacit tolerance continues. It won't.

None of the hundreds of co-operative owners, or the soon to be elected executive committee, will ever benefit thru illegal gambling activity.

And i do I mean "owners" as in every member who wants to be an equal owner, freely can be, and if and when any of us ever do benefit, it wont be illegally.

To legitimize 28 cardrooms in Maricopa through municipal or county authoritynis my goal. Let cardrooms operate on the competitve open free trade market in Arizona cities, towns and counties, if not the State (hands tied by poison pill). Let Arizona compete wuth California and Nevada and let all non-Indian citizens have our game back.

So, codified substantive policies be damned, my other unanswered question posed to you was: what state law or codified SPS prevents a city or county, thru resolution, referandum, or initiative, their sovereign right to license, regulate, and tax a cardroom just as the State has done for one select class or race of its citizens?

Still all ears.

You're mistaken. You specifically say that: "[Your Poker Business is] also exempted from illegal gambling under ARS 13-3301(1)(d)(iii) and 13-3311 "Amusement Gambling." in your most recent piece of spam email.

You flat-out tell your customers (and whomever else you spam) that what they're doing is exempted under Amusement Gambling. You've been including it in your spam email since at least December.

When the cookie crumbles, I look forward to the virtual storming of the castle by villagers with pitchforks and torches who demand that you explain to them how you arrived at the awesome legal advice you unsolicited send every couple weeks.

It's pretty cool that you present that in your spam as fact - no hint of a reminder that it shouldn't be interpreted as legal advice, or that it's only your opinion and that the State of Arizona obviously disagrees with you.

--

As to Lee, this goes in circles. If poker isn't gambling, Lee could have benefited under it legally. He can't be found guilty of legally benefiting from totally legal social and amusement gambling, right? ...but since Lee is a convicted felon, found so by a jury, it's pretty clear how the courts of Arizona -- AND THE PEOPLE -- see poker.

It's not a waste of taxpayer money to bring criminals to justice.

Lee IS a criminal, and he was not only operating a criminal enterprise, but was instructing others how to operate a criminal enterprise.

Ultimately, the person who caused the waste to happen was Lee. If you don't want to see the state waste money on a trial -- money which, when spent, goes back into the state's pockets, so it's not like we light the money on fire, the state taking money out of its left pocket and putting it in its right pocket -- then perhaps you should advise the next Judge Lee that he's the cause of your concern.

That'll be a fun thing for you to try to present at your trial. Do you have keys to the building that you lease? Does the gambling activity, even in part, help generate the money that pays for that lease? If so, you benefit from use of that building, at least in an indirect way, which is the very definition of illegal in Arizona.

...but that's just one simple example. I'm sure the state will be happy to provide more.

---

As to why you're alone here, I've got better theories about squeaky wheels.

The fact that gambling in Arizona is illegal under broad state laws unless it fits a narrow scope of terms, of which a business will never meet. ...since it includes such so-simple-even-normal-people-won't-be-confused terms as "not operated as a business."

Or, you can be regulated. ..and the STATE law says that regulation can only occur in accordance with a state tribal compact or by 13-3301(6)(b) which is also entirely up to the STATE.

...and I'm answering your question, clearly, plainly, in simple English. That's the STATE LAW that prevents you from doing what you want to do. Until you change 13-3301 to have a section (c) that says, "...or as regulated by a county" [or whatever], then you're bound by state law.

Ok, so you found a state law that says paying for a lease thru voluntary pay per use fees that we all, as co-owners and operators voted to do is illegal!? And this somehow overrides the constitutional right we have to equal protection of the law how? I think the law is in conflict with the constitutiin of the state and the usa.

The easier example is the volunteer dealers getting voluntarily tipped isnt it? So the act of tipping makes an otherwise legal act illegal (well, so far the case law in arizona points to an affirmative there, however, in every single one of those cases, the cardroom owner-operator was taking a percentage of dealer tips... An illegal practice clearly, yet still in widespread use today.

As for an old email disclaimer, thanks, proofreader. Good help is somhard to find these days! I will be sure to let the appropriately procured email blaster to fix that minor oversight that the ttj policies and procedures override.

So no codified sps yet Matt?

> ...since it includes such so-simple-even-normal-people-won't-be-confused terms as "not operated as a business."

A co-op is not "operated with the object of gain or advantage present or prospective" and it is therefore excluded as the whole "benefit" aka "business" issue silly man.

>Or, you can be regulated. ..and the STATE law says that regulation can only occur in accordance with a state tribal compact or by 13-3301(6)(b) which is also entirely up to the STATE.

The state grants municipal corporations the constitutional right to do as the state does, not as the state says. So if we were to want to operate a cardroom as a business, we could if the city authorized it, which, though not necessary for a co-op, is necessary for all cardrooms operating today as a business. You're welcome, potential felons.

...and I'm answering your question, clearly, plainly, in simple English. That's the STATE LAW that prevents you from doing what you want to do. Until you change 13-3301 to have a section (c) that says, "...or as regulated by a county" [or whatever], then you're bound by state law.

My friend the Constitutional Law expert says you are wrong.

As long as by "old disclaimer," you mean the one you sent this week, and have been sending for months, telling your customers (and everyone else you spam) that your game is exempted by amusement gambling, yes, that "old disclaimer."

So, yeah, whatever quasi-legal mumbo-jumbo you use to convince your patrons to keep coming.

Perhaps he should have testified at the Lee trial...

You're back to sounding like a tax-dodger again. Your idea may have merit, but until you prove it in court, you're just the next Judge Lee in waiting.

Of course have a set of keys to the buildings we lease, as do any number of duly authorized member-owners, vendors or volunteers. Similarly we have individuals we have collectively authorized to have access to the cage, register, safe, and make nightly co-operative deposits from the voluntary per use fees we have collectively vetted and suggested for member-owners in our private adult club espousing liberty. that we do indeed use to pay the lease on the building we all collectively own and control... Your point being???

Haha! Lee tried...he was limined like everything else. But the appeal is different. And the evidence is part of the record, even if limined in the court of entry, as it should be, right? Appeal is where change happens.

Of course these ideas have merit!

And i am, again and again, NOT the next Judge Lee. I am not operating for benefit. I, my friend, am operating for change. And have been for three years.

Thus has WHAT to do with taxes? And how am "i" sounding like a tax-dodger... "again" no less!?!

You sound like the guys who think the 14th amendment means they don't have to pay income tax. They might be right, but good luck not paying your taxes...

That'll be your burden in court.

Oh ya, thank goodness we have a bona fide 70.3% referral ratio on our memberships in our private co-operative social poker club. What is your bome game ratio Matt? Hope its a majority too!

More libel?

And au contraire, it'll be your burden to prove first, to get me in court. And to that, I say good luck... with an open book policy it should be relatively easy for you to establish my guilt, Matt. Sure beats guesswork, assumptions, speculation, libel, lies and hearsay.

Asked and answered, repeatedly.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=629

...also not the subject of the thread, nor this forum.

That'd be up to the state (or city, or ADG or whoever), not me.

True true, but just for the sake of comparison, do 7 out of 10 people in your home game know each other outside of the card game? Because while you think you may have answered the question, before, and repeatedly, I do not believe you, only because i have never seen the question posed before. But nice job avoiding the irrelevant question nonetheless. Well played sir. Truth of the matter is, our co-operative cardroom is more bona fide social than 93% of all home games.

So correct me if I am wrong here, but it sounds like you are saying yiu are NOT qualified to act as judge and jury, especially on matters that you know nothing about.

Ok, i can agree with that.

So about these phantom sps... any luck yet?

Weeeeeee! Defensive are we?

Again, the irony or maybe its hypocrisy again... You razz TJ for writing The Poker Manifesto and yet you are the ine who's home game requires not only a charter, but a dedicated 2+2 forum to defend your right to rake your players blind with a mandatory rake... Oh wait (laughter)... "future proposition wager" ... Haha ... With no unfair advantage for organizers ... And ... And omg hahaha... All this and you dont even hire a pro dealer?

I am guilty, Matt. I will admit, of allowing me and nearly 700 bona fide card carrying members to reap the benefit, that thing of value, present or prospective, of cost savings by providing poker players with a safe, legitimate professional cardroom alternative to the state sanctioned monopoly on professional poker.

Guilty of saving players money and offering a not unlawful choice. Mayne guiltynof creating jobs, although as volunteers only till we get done lobbying.

And i guess since we are a not-for-profit, but not a non-profit, we can lobby as our primary mission, amirite?

And so, as i am fond of saying, and as you, my muse, inspired so long ago -- if we are a group that meets to discuss poker legislative efforts, and we happen to play some scheduled card games (non banked) and discuss our agenda at the poker table instead of a boardroom table, does that make our grassroots movement any less viable or legitimate? I mean, we have had and continue our contact with three cities, our local state reps, the ADG, the AG, the Secretary of State... Trying to enable munis to regulate for benefit cardrooms like the state has for the tribes. It is just a matter of time. Maybe if i step away from ttj, since it is now self-sufficient entity, i would have more time to dedicate to lobbying for change, so all cardrooms can advertise, and compete, openly and freely.


Not guilty of greed.

Mayhaps you should consider this fact before lighting your next match.

Also guilty of standing up to tyranny.