Conventional media are eventually becoming at tentative to the silly US gambling policies, emphasizing out the mass of matters generated by the online gambling ban and rejecting to accept insincere rationales protecting sports betting blocks, but not letting online hold’em poker, slot machines and blackjack.
Established media are finally turning to the irrationalities of US gambling laws and policies, and this week the subject is the problematical ban on online gambling. The Los Angeles Times advertised a column this week by Michael Hiltzik revealing the ludicrous hypocrisy and waste involved in the UIGEA Internet casino obstruction.
Hiltzik, a financial news author, reveals the contradictory, unclear, and contradictory nature of US law regarding online gambling. Hitzlik’s article is followed by Washington Post columnist Maureen Dowd’s authorization of US News and World Report publisher Mort Zuckerman’s proposition to permit newspapers to operate sports betting services.
Hiltzik spots out of the international legal disagreements created by emphasizing on operating a protectionist online gambling ban, and asks why the six states that do have laws against Internet gaming think their legal land-based gambling is different.
Hitzlik also addresses the mistreatment of the Wire Act by the US Department of Justice, observing that only sports betting is permitted by the law as decided by the courts. The DoJ insists all online gambling is illegal, in spite of court rulings to the adverse. However, then, the DoJ selectively imposes this law that supposedly makes all Internet gaming illegal.
“Of course Internet gambling has its dangers, including the possibility of addictive playing and the enticement of minors,” writes Hitlzik. “But banning the recreation forces these problems into the shadows where they’re harder to address and makes it unobtainable to enlist the industry in helping to fight them.”
