63 Comments - Levois - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:49 am: Well, this is a post for libertarians. - reformer - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:50 am: Why did the video poker industry lobby so hard for legalizing payouts if doing so would hurt a significant segment of that industry? - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:54 am: ===this is a post for libertarians.=== Some would just call it common historical sense. - Fed up - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:56 am: Put the machines in Ohare and Midway so we can get some revenue out of the few convention travelers still coming here. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:56 am: It’s a pretty simple concept supported by clear and solid evidence. I’d add the state Lottery to your list of where government took away a cash cow from The Outfit. Sam Giancana rocketed to the top by murdering his way into the South Side policy wheel numbers games. From what you read, video gaming has been The Outfit’s biggest thing for a while. State machines would be a big hit on its revenue. - GA Watcher - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:58 am: Fed Up: Video gaming is currently banned within the City of Chicago. - reformer - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:00 am: Wordslinger: So the video game industry lobbied for legalization in order to deprive itself of revenue? - Tony - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:01 am: Right on, Rich! The nanny state types haven’t quite figured out that if you legalize an activity and/or product, you are taking it away from the unsavory types that are profiting on it and can regulate it. To heck with medical marijuana - just legalize it. Same with video gambling. As for the arguments re: addiction, folks are going to get addicted to this stuff whether it’s legal or not (or they will get addicted to something else). We can’t stop some people from becoming addicts! (Sorry for the rant…) - Back to Work - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:01 am: Rich is right. If your concern is illegal gaming then you should support the new state-managed video gaming system. It bans all un-licensed machines, and makes it a felony just to possess them. The guesswork for law enforcement is removed. Either you are licensed or you are not. Not to mention billions in projects and hundreds of thousands of jobs. I am an advocate working working to help implement the capital plan and the video gaming system that funds it. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:04 am: Yeah, the gangs will just go away if you take their drug business away from them. Just like they went away after the Volstead Act was repealed. Oh, wait, they didn’t. They just moved onto something else. Hows’about drugs? Make them illegal and the gangs will disappear. Really? What about prostitution (you know, that victimless crime)? Hows’about the juice rackets? Hey, gangs get involved in hijacking trucks and trains of the goods they haul. I guess we can make that legal, too, since we want to get them out of that business. Or kidnapping. In some countries, that is big business for organized crime. We’ll tell the Lindbergs that the loss of their baby is a cost of being an American where we don’t infringe on legitimate, legal, transactions. The fact is, gangs will move their operations to some other illegal activity. What do we do then? Legalize all that, too? Just to keep the gangs from taking over? How well is the legalized drug culture doing over in Holland? They have such drug problems they don’t know what to do now. Just because it is difficult to enforce a law doesn’t mean we should give up. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:09 am: I’m sure the legitimate part of the “industry” would like to produce and distribute more machines. The ones who profit illegally from the machines, presumably tax free and certainly unregulated, like it just the way it is now. It was the same during Prohibition. Legitimate brewers and distillers definitely wanted booze legalized. Bootleggers did not. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:11 am: You guys are right! With Las Vegas legalizing everything, the Mob never sets foot there, never gets involved in anything, and doesn’t get a dime. Only an intellectual can entertain ideas as stupid as that! The rest of us are t o o s l o w t o u n d e r s t a n d y o u r b r i l l i a n c e ! - Amalia - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:17 am: Legalize it! Poker included. and while we are at it, everyone stop obsessing over hemp and make that a legal crop for Illinois. Farmers in Kentucky are exploring the use and Illinois needs to get on the sustainable agricultural bandwagon. Hemp is a wonder plant, not a drug. - Back to Work - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:26 am: Vanilla, you mean those “mobbed-up” companies like Hilton and Hyatt and Starwood that run the casino’s in Vegas? No one is arguing that organized crime will be run out of business. What we are saying is that not having to guess whether or not someone is breaking the law is a benefit for law enforcement and for communities. Either you have a license or you do not. The transactions will be tracked by the state and the machines will be tied in just like the lottery machines are. Instead of sheriffs staking out American Legion halls - where the machines already exist - they can use their valuable resources to go after the other issues you infer. - OneMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:32 am: Didn’t the Lottery basically kill of Policy/Numbers in Chicago? Seems like the same sort of thing here. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:32 am: It’s true that organized crime, especially the Chicago Outfit, made a lot of illegal money via legal gambling in Las Vegas. They were able to do so because it’s a state regulated industry — and the state’s political big shots were in cahoots with the gangsters. It wasn’t until the feds turned up the heat in the early ’80s that the mob got run out of town. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:40 am: ===Didn’t the Lottery basically kill of Policy/Numbers in Chicago?=== Yes. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:42 am: While we’re at it, we should legalize crack and crank. Truly benign substances that we, as adults, should be able to choose to use. While both are highly addictive that shouldn’t worry us since booze is highly addictive also. The date rape drug should fall into that catagory, as well. I mean, if a person wants to use that drug, why not? When does something cross the line from a personal vice to a societal problem? Booze is not legal, it is controlled. We don’t allow minors to use alcohol. It is tough to keep it out of their hands but we try because of the societal good. We don’t give up because it is hard to enforce. We don’t rub our hands with glee at the prospect of higher tax revenues from the sale of tobacco and alcohol to minors. There is a line that should not be crossed. There is a cost to keep that line where it is. That cost is borne by taxpayers. You’all are just itching to get your hands on some cheap smoke while you are mindlessly pulling the handle on the one armed bandit. Oh, joy. Life is sweet. Get a life. I have used most of the illegal substances that are out there. Then I grew up. I found out life is infinitely more interesting when I create my own experiences whether they are from setting tough goals and realizing them or engaging in adventures of some risk that bring about powerful feelings of joy and accomplishment. Lighting up some pot may get you a temporary feeling of euphoria but it is ephemeral. Of no intrinsic value. Does not build your life up. Valueless. G.E.T.A.L.I.F.E. - Irish - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:43 am: The video poker/gambling machine issue is just like the handgun issue. If you make them illegal the only ones that will have them are the criminals! My blood pressure doubles every time I hear a city/village official make the statement that they are not going to allow gaming machines to come into their town/city so they are going to ban them. Hello? They are already there! There are thousands of these machines in bars and taverns across the state. Some, very few, don’t pay out anything they are solely for entertainment. The rest of them pay out in degrees. Some pay out if you are a regular and you know to approach the bartender/owner to get paid, others just pay out. Just getting a part of what is already out there will be a plus. Either these officials are very naive, or they lead a very sheltered life. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:44 am: DD, are you still talking about video gaming? I think that was the topic when we came in. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:44 am: ===I have used most of the illegal substances that are out there.=== The question that legalization proponents would have for you, then, would be: Should you have spent time in prison for those illegal acts of consumption? Plain and simple. That’s the bottom line. - OneMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:48 am: One thing that I would like to see changed about video gaming as they want to do it in this state is have the machines owned by the state lottery. I think that would address some concerns as well as improve the take for both the state and the local municipalities. - Just Noticed - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:56 am: I feel like a lot of people are missing the point here. The outfit has been running video poker long before it was legalized in July. I don’t know anything about the Szaflarski case, but my guess would be most if not all of his illegal gambling activities occured prior to the July legalization. Regardless of your stance on legalizing video poker, it is really hard to argue that legalization would benefit organized crime who is already operating video poker outside of the law. Hence, the S-T editorial board is full of it. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:03 am: If I was caught for possessing and/or using those illegal substances, the answer is yes. A discussion of how much time would be appropriate would take much more time. Disparities in sentencing between powder and crack cocaine is an example. White folk w/powder getting a pass while black folk w/crack getting crushed is unfair. Useful treatment programs and probation/light sentences to start out then increase them w/recidivism. I believe some celebrities have spoken out on their addictions (Robert Downer, Jr comes to mind) and have stated that they would likely have died if it weren’t for the contact w/law enforcement and the dept of corrections. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:13 am: ===If I was caught for possessing and/or using those illegal substances, the answer is yes. === That’s kind of a weasely way out of the question, dude. But here’s a follow-up: Which would’ve been more damaging to your life, using the drugs that you did or going to prison for using those drugs? - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:13 am: So Illinois is now so broke, we are now considering legalizing vices in order to get money from them. And here I thought we were supposed to take what our parents and grandparents handed to us, and make our society better, and leave it in better care than how we received it. But I guess looking for magic beans or golden eggs justifies a lot of things one normally would never justify. Let’s do what we would normally do if we had a successfully operated state government, instead of continuing to lower our morals to help them out. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:16 am: - If I was caught for possessing and/or using those illegal substances, the answer is yes. - But what is the crime, that you weren’t adding value to your life? Did you harm anyone besides possibly your own health? I’m not sure I understand how some of the “harder” drugs could be legalized and regulated, but I certainly don’t understand how someone getting high and not affecting anyone else is a crime. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:17 am: ===make our society better, and leave it in better care than how we received it.=== Exactly. Ending the imprisonment of otherwise law-abiding citizens for vice is a worthy reform. We discourage smoking by taxing the heck out of it, not tossing people into prison. No reason why that wouldn’t work elsewhere. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:24 am: STL, Oh, the victimless crime arguement. Bullspit. Addiction is not a victimless activity. Even pot, tho not physically addictive, takes people away from purposeful life. Including intimate relationships. There are victims in that. Get a life out of meaningful activity, not out of a cloud of smoke. If both adults want to engage in prostitution, where is the crime? Research shows there is actual harm to both participants and to neighborhoods/society. Vicimless…NOT. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:26 am: We don’t tax the heck out of minors to prevent them from smoking tobacco. It is a crime. There is a line. We get to choose where to put that line. Making it seem innocuous does not change reality. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:27 am: ===Even pot, tho not physically addictive, takes people away from purposeful life=== So, we’re now imprisoning people who don’t have a purposeful life? - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:28 am: dupage dan - You can offer your personal beliefs up all day long, and yes, there are many problems associated with addiction. But those problems occur with alcohol and other addictions, yet those aren’t criminalized. Specific actions should be criminalized, like drunk driving, negligence, etc. But throwing someone in jail for possessing some pot is asinine. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:28 am: ===We don’t tax the heck out of minors to prevent them from smoking tobacco. It is a crime.=== The operative word is: Minors. We’re talking about adults here. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:31 am: There is no such thing as a victimless crime. Every crime has a victim. That is why it is called a crime. Or do you really think our ancestors were so repeatedly stupid that they just have it in for some vices, but not others? If you do, then thank god you have finally showed up in human history so that we can finally have the truth revealed! We’ve been waiting millenniums for your personal brilliance! Why do these supporters refuse to consider their lack of consequential knowledge regarding these issues? You people are so short sighted. Want to balance the state budget without legalizing vices for tax money? Try! - antigambler - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:34 am: Mob gambling route operators have been known to bomb the offices of gambling competitors. With Illinois government trying to take a piece of their action, will legislators need new security measures? - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:43 pm: - You people are so short sighted. - You’re right VMan, only you have intimate knowledge of the consequences of every action in life. Thanks for sharing your wisdom with us simple folk. - I have a question... - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:48 pm: Who is going to be “busting tavern owners” for illegal games? Local police? Gaming Board officials? Tavern owners will keep illegal games because they make money that way. The return on a State owned machine ends up being about 10% for the owner versus the 50% they earn now. I have a feeling the bars that still allow smoking indoors (we all know they exist) will probably scoff at this one too. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:51 pm: I use some rhetorical flourish to my post and that is what is focused on, not the meat of the piece. I don’t advocate putting people in prison because they have no meaningful life. There is a societal cost to certain actions and behaviors on the part of some members. There should be certain taboos that should not be violated. These behaviors are, or should be, considered taboos because of the negative effect they have on society. One way to counteract those violations is to put a sanction on the behavior. Fines are one such sanction. Community service is another. probation a third. Jail and Prison are next along with the possiblity of the death sentence. Rich, you asked if I should spend time in prison for these illegal acts and I answered that if I was caught, then yes. How is that a weasely answer? What would you have me do, call the cops every time I smoked a joint and turn my self in? Really? Some time ago there was a thread here where there was a discussion about when someone can be called a criminal My stance then was that the commission of a crime makes me the criminal. I was exoriated by you, and others, for that statement. I was told that I could only be called a criminal if I was caught. You now appear to be changing that stance a little bit. Regarding what would be more damaging to my life - using drugs or going to prison for using drugs - the case of Robert Downer, Jr is illustrative. In open court he told the Judge that he would be dead if he hadn’t been stopped by the cops and the judge. What is more damaging in that case? Death or prison? Since you want to make the argument/discussion so black and white with no gradations that question is as valid as yours. Is there no behavior that necessitates state sanction? Why exclude minors? I know some very mature 12 year olds who can make good decisions. Why can’t they? In reality, psychologists tell us that the human brain doesn’t really understand the consequences of many actions and isn’t truly mature until the person is about 30 years old. Should we consider people minors until they are 30? Gotta draw the line somewhere, dude. - Back to Work - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:55 pm: “I Have a Question” The share for business owners is set in law at 35%. And the punishment for possession of an unlicensed machine is a Class 4 felony vs. the relatively minor hit for a smoking violation. Business owners - like most people - would like to operate lawfully. Bottom line, this system reduced illegal gambling, sets a clear standard for law enforcement, helps a lot of local business and their employees, funds a lot of projects and provides revenue for local municipalities. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:58 pm: STL, Simply put - you want what you want when you want it. Don’t limit me, man! Get a life. Create your life. Make a hard decision on a difficult challenge and do your best. Or get your quick jollies out of a pipe for a few bucks. Gotta work for that few bucks tho - or maybe your Mom could front you some cash. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:01 pm: ===Get a life.=== I would suggest you do that, instead of poking your nose into somebody else’s private affairs. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:12 pm: It’s a very personal issue, Rich, with huge ramifications for our society. While I don’t demand someone else expose their personal beliefs and actions I did so to illustrate a point. I pushed into the other person to make my point. Rough and tumble without being too mean. BTW - how am I weasely? - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:31 pm: Thanks for the advice. Just so you know I’ll tell you a little about myself. I am a mechanical engineering graduate of the University of Illinois. I am employed full time as a mechanical engineer, and I’m certainly not rich but I don’t borrow any money from anyone except a bank. In my spare time I read a great deal. I play guitar, sing, and write music. I also enjoy riding motorcycles and I volunteer for multiple organizations. I don’t do drugs, but I do drink alcohol. So the next time you feel the need to give me advice, maybe save it and use that energy to make a real point about something once in a while. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:58 pm: only you have intimate knowledge of the consequences of every action in life. Your mockery demonstrates your misunderstanding. Consequential knowledge cannot be known to one single person. There are no self-proclaimed experts in the real world. Consequentially, we must be aware that we risk the long run viability of our society when we focus on the short term and justify the legalization of most vices in order to solve our state’s insolvency. Consequential knowledge is decentralized within the society itself. As to Rich’s earlier point, we wouldn’t be having this conversation if we were not bankrupted. As a result, it is also logical that any societal benefit would not be the focus of this legislation. Historically, this has not been the case, except in regards to the ending of Prohibition due to the fiscal crisis of the Great Depression. Being broke is no reason to legalize a vice. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:02 pm: DD and VMan, you’re both hysterical in every sense of the word. I’d say more, but I have to hit the liquor store for some Jack Daniels, Winsgtons and Lotto tickets on my way to the riverboat. And VMan, our ancestors didn’t have all the answers. They accepted a lot of stuff over the years that I think even you would consider pretty bad today. Your nostalgia for a time that never existed is always touching. - Just Noticed - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:09 pm: ===Being broke is no reason to legalize a vice.=== Maybe true, maybe not. That point could be agrued, but you can’t deny that the S-T’s argument against legalization in today’s paper is completely ridiculous. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:11 pm: - Being broke is no reason to legalize a vice. - When did I ever use the argument of being broke as a reason to decriminalize drugs? My argument is based on the belief I have that someone’s choice to indulge in a vice is not a crime if it doesn’t directly harm anyone else. We might not be having this argument if we weren’t broke, but I would feel the same way regardless. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:21 pm: word, Yeah, call us hysterical, that’ll win the argument. Can I stop waving my arms, now? I gotta go, myself. The bong water is stale and we we’re gonna get some ripple to replace it cause it makes for a better high. I don’t have any cash, tho, so we’re gonna take some from my kid sisters’ piggy bank. Gee, I wish this stuff was legal so it would be cheaper. Why are you people so serious, man? It is such a downer. Haha. - Ghost - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:29 pm: === Walgreen’s and CVS won’t be shooting bullets at each other to vie for street corner space. === I got a nasty paper cut trying to sift through their competitor coupons….. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:33 pm: BTW, Using being broke as a reason to legalize video poker is part of the discussion of this stream. PQ started out justifying legalizing this as a way to fund the capitol construction program, didn’t he? VM didn’t accuse you of using that argument. Go back and read his post. The repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933 was an economic decision. Got a lot of people back to work and more taxes for the treasury. For better or worse, people in this country have accepted one vice that has a major impact on individuals and society. Alcohol abuse has a huge impact on us and our culture. Accepting new vices into the mix is not a neutral act. It adds to the mix. It adds to the misery, to the societal cost. Look at Holland, for example. Their drug problem has reached epidemic levels after liberalization and that will be some hard toothpaste to put back into the tube. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:44 pm: Dan, I think you better go back and read it instead. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:50 pm: STL, “as to Rich’s earlier point…” You ain’t Rich. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:55 pm: - Consequentially, we must be aware that we risk the long run viability of our society when we focus on the short term and justify the legalization of most vices in order to solve our state’s insolvency. - He said that above the second paragraph in a direct comment to me, genius. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:24 pm: STL, His was a general point directed to the central issue of this stream. As it appears from the outset, the 2 issues are inextricably connected. While your main focus seems to be on the supposed victimless nature of the activity, a major focus of this stream includes the potential benefits, via taxes, of legalizing vice(s). Perhaps you misplaced your posts? - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:29 pm: Well I guess Rich did on his own blog too, because he used some of the same arguments I did. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:46 pm: No one is perfect. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 4:29 pm: Thanks for the post Rich. I agree 100% with what you wrote. It’s too bad that some reactionaries here get all worked up about this and fail to see the sense of the legalized video gaming legislation. - Indeedy - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 5:18 pm: *We don’t tax the heck out of minors to prevent them from smoking tobacco. It is a crime.* We tax the heck out of cigarettes, in part, to discourage minors from smoking. And btw, it’s the purchase that is the crime, not the smoking. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 5:44 pm: That’s me, 47th ward, Mr Reactionary. In point of fact I was a left wing radical for decades but got tired of the hypocracy. Got tired of apoligizing for being an American male. Realized that legalizing a vice doesn’t make it a good thing. Just more fodder for the pols eating at the public trough. Get a look at who gambles at the boats, dude. Seniors and people in wheelchairds - people little able to pay for their own food let alone gamble. Some tax, eh? - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 6:03 pm: DD, dealing in stereotypes makes everything easier. I’m not sure what your problem is with seniors or people in wheelchairs, but the last time I was at the boats in Joliet it was a pretty good cross-section of the state. Plenty of American males and none of them were apologizing, either. Did your conversion give you some insight as to how others should spend their time? What is it your business if someone gambles at the boats, anyway? - HERE YOU GO - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 7:32 pm: People dont want video gambling that is why it is getting banned in so many municipalites and so forth. Its simple give daley his city owned casino and let them put slots at the race tracks. These 2 options will make up the funds of video gambling and everyone is happy. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 8:43 pm: Dan, I wasn’t referring directly to you, but if the shoe fits… No one is suggesting gambling is a super great thing for society, that there isn’t a problem with people throwing away what little money they have, etc. No one is saying drug use should be widely popular and free of social stigma. But gambling and drug use exist. Pretending that your sermons will change this sad-but-true fact is folly. Laws like the new video poker legislation are regulating some of this behavior. That is a positive thing. In the current absence of regulation, criminals are controlling much of the sin trade. We can either try to change that, and perhaps benefit from collecting additional sin taxes. Or we can do nothing and pretend it isn’t really happening. The status quo is only enriching criminals, filling prisons and bankrupting our state. It’s time to try something different, and that starts by acknowledging reality. - No name ever - Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 9:45 pm: Duh, The point of the Sun-Times editorial is that this is Illinois folks. We’ve got a long, sorry history or corruption and mob influence. We had the mob try to get into Emerald Casino. They were stopped. The Gaming Board found the mob at one of the other casinos a few years back. A a mob controlled company did very little work for a lot of money. There was a big fine issued and the GM was shown the door. When video gaming is up and running in Illinois it will be the largest video poker jurisdiction in the WORLD. They’ll be 45,000 machines and none of them being monitored by an eye in the sky, or directly by an on-site IGB agent. The mob knows this. They’re smacking their lips. They’ve been in business for close to 100 years. Do you think they don’t know how to hide their tracks, create dummy corporations, cleanse themselves so to speak to get a taste of the action? Wake up. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.