Online Gambling - (Cough, Cough) Excuse Reasons for Making it Illegal
One of the reasons often cited for stripping you of a right to gamble online is money laundering. The problem with this logic is that money can be laundered in so many ways.

If our lawmakers are supposed to be so much smarter than we are, how come they can't stop money laundering at the source?

Why should I have to lose my right to bet online just because the government can't do its job?

In my opinion this is one of the many "excuse reasons" to do away with online gambling.

Lawmakers responsible for taking your right to gamble online away probably know that their true reasons for wanting you not to gamble online wouldn't stand up in court. So they use such sugar coat arguments to cover their true reasons.

What reasons might those be?

Reasons of morality for one.

Let me tell you something about morality. It's a personal choice, just like anything else in this world. You can choose not to gamble online if you don't feel right about doing it.

But don't push your personal morals on me. I don't push mine on you. As long as I am not harming you, lay off.

What's even more ridiculous is that someone who thinks that gambling online is immoral, can gamble legally in an Atlantic City casino, a Las Vegas sportsbook, and many other places in the U.S.

Does that sound constitutional to you?

Why is it legal to gamble in a Las Vegas sportsbook or casino but not online?
A great question, and one that I don't think is handled by U.S laws in a constitutional fashion...

How come you can legally bet in some parts of the country but not all of the country?

Talk about unequal protection under the law! It's okay for some people to bet on sports and play poker and blackjack, but it's not okay for others to do so simply based on your location within the SAME COUNTRY?

It reeks of protectionism. Why should someone who is in Las Vegas which is located in the Unites States of America be able to gamble on sports-- but for someone who is located in New York it would be considered a crime if they bet on sports or played poker or blackjack?

Does that sound constitutional to you?

Does that sound like equal rights under the laws of the United States of America, the land of the free and the brave?

What if I am unable to travel from New York to Las Vegas because of a physical disability? Shouldn't I be able to gamble online if I want to?

What if I can't afford the expensive trip and hotel rates in Las Vegas?

Perhaps I would rather use that money on gambling instead of airfare and a room. I would think that would improve my odds because I wouldn't have to shell out thousands of dollars just to get to Las Vegas which would put me in a big hole right off the bat. I should be able to gamble online in I want to. It's fundamentally no different than gambling "offline" in a Las Vegas sports book & casino.

The only real difference is the location. But I'm still in the same country as someone located in Las Vegas who is allowed to gamble. This is totally unfair in my opinion. How can this be called constitutional?

Ownership of Gambling Establishments
By the same token, why should some people in the United States be able to own gambling establishments and profit from such ownership while others cannot?

Why should some big corporation in Las Vegas be able to offer sports betting to U.S citizens, but if I want to open a sportsbook in cyberspace I would end up in jail for who knows how many years?

I say it's unconstitutional and once again reeks of protectionism.

What if I cannot afford to build a hotel /casino/ sportsbook in Las Vegas?

The costs of entering this industry are just too prohibitive to provide for fair competition...

My only choice might be to offer such gambling & betting services online where I could forgo the heavy costs of building construction and liability insurance for guests, etc...

This is supposed to be the United State of America, a free country. But I'm not allowed to open such an establishment online because according to lawmakers it could be used for money laundering. Well guess what, a Las Vegas casino could also be used to launder money. And a car could also be used to commit homicide. But that doesn't mean selling cars can be made illegal on such grounds.

More Bogus Arguments Against Online Gambling - The Compulsive Gambler Angle
First of all, compulsive gamblers also exist in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, and thousands of other places. In my opinion it's just more unconstitutionality being thrown in our faces by lawmakers.

Yes compulsive gamblers do exist. And they make up a small percentage of overall gamblers. So why is it okay for gambling to exist in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, and many other places in the U.S, but if I want to host it on a server located in the United States, then I would be breaking the law?

Lawmakers try to argue that gambling online makes it "easier" for compulsive gamblers.

But before online gambling existed the easiest way to gamble compulsively was in a Las Vegas or Atlantic City casino. And those are still okay under the law.

So the legal question is, why are those legal and still legal today but for the same reason online gambling & betting is not?

You see, it's just another "excuse reason"... Totally unconstitutional in my opinion. I may not be a lawyer, but I can smell unfairness from a miles away. And it's coming from D.C.

Furthermore, by the same token I could argue that "over-eating" can lead to a heart attack. So to protect people from over eating could I make a law that states you are no longer allowed to eat?

If you eat, you will be prosecuted. And if found guilty you will be locked up in jail for the betterment of society. What a bunch of hogwash! Just because compulsive gambling exists, doesn't mean you can constitutionally make a law against online gambling... Especially when gambling is allowed to persist in the same country in other venues!

I am sick and tired of lawmakers telling me how I can and cannot spend my own money
Lawmakers tell me I have to pay 35% of my income to them for taxes. But that is where it ends!

The rest of that money is mine to decide how to spend. And if it's legal for someone to take their money to a Las Vegas sportsbook, an Atlantic City casino, a Connecticut casino, and Mississippi casino and gamble to their hearts content, then how come I can't engage in the same activity over the internet?

UNCONSTITUTIONAL I say!

Unequal protection under the law!

Unequal opportunity under the law.

This is the United States of America, the land of the free. If I want to over-eat I will over-eat. If I want to over-gamble, I will over-gamble. If I want to eat in moderation, I will eat in moderation. If I want to gamble in moderation, I will gamble in moderation. And it should make no difference what part of the United States I do it from Las Vegas, New York, or online from either of those locations.

Why are other forms of online gambling legal such as horse racing?
Why is it legal to bet on horse racing online in many places in the U.S, but it's not legal for me to bet on other sports online such as football or basketball?

Furthermore, why is it legal for people to bet on movements in the stock market online but not the movements of a football up and down the field?

Talk about money laundering. The amount of money laundering that takes place in financial markets is probably thousands of times the amount that might take place in an online gambling establishment. So why aren't financial markets made to be illegal?

In my opinion it's another "excuse argument" shown for the folly and unconstitutionality that it promotes.

Freedome to express these opinions... How long before lawmakers take that away too?
This is the United States of America, the land of the free. It is also the land of the brave. So if I want to write about laws that I think are unconstitutional then I will do it with no fear of repercussion from my government...

As I once heard in a very interesting movie, "people should not be afraid of their governments... Governments should be afraid of their people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

If you are responsible for laws against online gambling, might you be in violation of acts designed to prevent protectionism, prevent unfair trade opportunities, and the like.

American entrepreneurs have a right to compete in the economy. If some Americans can own betting establishments, why can't others do so from a different location within the same country? Until online gambling is made to be legal in the U.S, the gambling industry may be operating in the waters of unconstitutionality.

It's legal to gamble online in Great Britain
Aren't we are supposed to be the land of the free. Didn't we break away from Great Britain so that we could become a freer nation????

Then how the heck is a personal freedom like online gambling legal over there in what's supposed to be the repressive country that we broke away from, but it's illegal here in the land of free?

Our current lawmakers are clearly to blame!!! They have taken us backwards in time, robbing us of our personal freedoms that took years to fight for, often through the spilling of blood of many of our ancestors in the process. All for what? So lawmakers can cover up our own government's inability to stop something like money laundering so they blame it on online gambling as a hidden way to protect the brick and mortar sportsbooks and casinos of the United States who operate and profit in an industry that other Americans are somehow unable to legally participate in?

Hogwash!

Lawmakers concerned about money laundering should be concerned about money leaving the U.S.
Is it any wonder a recession is hitting home?

In spite of the laws designed to outlaw online gambling which appear more like masks for protecting horse racing from online sports betting, and protecting Las Vegas from offshore sportsbooks & casinos, Americans are still gambling online in offshore venues.

Whether it's online poker, online blackjack, online sports betting or online bingo, the fact is that money is leaving the U.S, never to return. And that's not healthy for our economy.

One thing lawmakers never seem to understand is that people are going to gamble weather it's legal or not. Therefore, at least the profits from such gambling activities could be recirculating throughout the U.S economy... But no! Instead our lawmakers made it illegal so that all the money would end up in the hands of foreign interests.

In the end, the laws which prohibit online gambling are just another sad example of lawmakers dropping the ball, and letting good American money leave our country, when instead, the profits from online gambling could be going into the hands of U.S citizens who could be owners of U.S based online sportsbooks, casinos, and poker rooms-- who would then put that money back to work in our own economy.

You can almost call it reverse money laundering as lawmakers allow American dollars to leave the country simply because they aren't smart enough or fair enough to take something that's been legal in the brick and mortar world for decades, and also make it legal in the online world.

Conclusion
My conclusion & opinion is that any law that makes a given activity "illegal" in an online setting, when that activity is legal in a brick and mortar setting is clearly an unfair law, an unconstitutional law, and an unjust law. And should be repealed as such...

Furthermore, in my opinion it would stand that any lawmaker whom enacts a law that makes any given activity "illegal" in an online setting, when that activity is "legal" in a brick and mortar setting, has clearly violated the very principals of the constitution in enacting such legislation, and should be removed from office for failing to uphold the basic principles of the constitution when it comes to lawmaking.

Current offending unconstitutional laws under this line of thinking would be the 1961 Wire Act as well as The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

Just imagine if lawmakers enacted legislation making it a crime to bank online while at the same time allowing legislation to exist that makes it legal to bank in a brick & mortar setting... What's even more despicable is how The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was apparently passed into law.

Apparently at the last second Bill Frist attached The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act to the imperative Safe Port Act designed to protect the U.S. against terrorism.

So, what do online gambling and terrorism have in common?

Get ready for that age old money laundering "excuse reason" again.

Enough is enough... Heck, hotels have more in common with terrorism than online gambling does. After all, didn't the 911 terrorists stay at hotels in the U.S. for quite sometime before committing their heinous acts of murder? Then perhaps "hotel stays" should have been outlawed rather than outlawing gambling on the internet in the name of National security.

What's even more disturbing is that Bill Frist succeeded in funneling something into law that many members of congress didn't even know was added to the Safe Port Bill. Just imagine what kind of treasonous laws could potentially be enacted using this deviously secret method of lawmaking!

What if Bill Frist had added a clause that stated every first born shall be put to death at twelve noon the next day? He actually might have been able to sneak such an atrocity into law using the same method he used to "ghostingly" slip the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act through via the Safe Port Bill.

I cannot imagine for one moment that our founding fathers had this kind of stealth & secrecy in mind when they wrote the section of the constitution that puts forth the process of how bills are to be passed into law. In my opinion such methods designed to "mask" the true contents of a bill until the last few moments before the vote is due to take place blatantly violate the very spirit of the constitution. And I would think by the same token any lawmaker that uses such methods to get laws enacted is likewise violating the basic spirit and principle of the constitution, and therefore isn't fit to hold a legislative position.