Gambling in Kentucky

[Jim Schue]

Let's take a tour of the sports world. NBA referee is convicted of gambling issues, maybe fixing some games and is threatening to bring other referees into the issue.

 

NFL and one of their stars going to prison for gambling on dog fights.

 

Peter Edward Rose still on the banished list of MLB alongside Shoeless Joe Jackson for his gambling issues.

 

Collegiate players in scam to fix games in point scandals.

 

You guys are right, gambling doesn't bring problems.

 

And for those who arguing that it is only a little gambling and that won't get you in trouble unless you don't have willpower and then it is your fault, were you the ones telling the 16 year old girl in the back seat of the car to "trust" you. You won't go THAT far.

 

I am not buying it. Gambling is wrong for this state. IMHO.

 

Each and every one of your issues is one where those involved took it one step beyond. If people are gambling responsibly — and while I know it's hard to believe, but the majority of people who gamble do so responsibly — it doesn't matter. It's when people try to take that extra step to rig the game in their favor and do something that is completely illegal that it becomes the problems you cited.

 

Just because I gamble doesn't mean I'm destined to become a hopeless addict. It's not an all or none question.

[Ms Liberty]

What about Bingo ?

[SilverShadow]

For those so opposed to gaming expansion (we already have gambling in this state, by the way) please tell how the finances of this state can be improved particular for education?

 

We do not have the backbone to tax smoking. We have a horrible imbalance on road tax distribution (same goes for education). And the sad fact is about 35% of the property in this state is considered only to be worth $200 per acre on tax rolls.

 

No gaming is fine with me and we have Mr. Fletcher who removed all the waste, fraud and abuse he could find. So what is actually left that will provide any real opportunity to advance and invest this state?

 

I give Beshear credit for having the courage to say, allow a vote, if it happens it could result in money for the state. Fletcher is saying no to allow for a vote, a year ago he was not going to stand in the way. So what is the answer?

[ram95]

Each and every one of your issues is one where those involved took it one step beyond. If people are gambling responsibly — and while I know it's hard to believe, but the majority of people who gamble do so responsibly — it doesn't matter. It's when people try to take that extra step to rig the game in their favor and do something that is completely illegal that it becomes the problems you cited.

 

Just because I gamble doesn't mean I'm destined to become a hopeless addict. It's not an all or none question.

It is the old story of addiction. Bottom line is that a lot of bad things will happen, but they are already happening online, at tracks, bingo halls, back rooms of pool halls, dog fights, cockfights with bookies, corner dice games and across the river at Indiana casinos. These people with addictions are going to find vice somewhere. By making it legal and monitoring it things are better then where they are going for it already. It is all about personal responsibility. And while I respect that some people have religious objections to it, I don't share those particular religious connections to this activity, and I personally feel that it would be more honest for them to say they don't like because of religious teaching then to try to slide in a social concern angle whose validity was basically destroyed by the Lottery, prohibition, and river boat gambling. I mean Southern Indiana is not my favorite place to hang out, but it is hardly another Las Vegas as far as crime due to river boat gambling. Truth be told it is a lot closer to being like Bullitt county then Vegas.

I can respect a persons religious beliefs about gambling even though I don't share them, but don't feed me a line about social concerns when evidence doesn't support it.

[ladiesbballcoach]

What about Bingo ?

There have been many times at bingo events where people have come in and cashed their paychecks and spent the night bingoing it away.

 

As a person who works in the school system, there have been times that people have come in and spent hundreds on bingo while their children are on free lunch and they are always in the schools asking for free stuff because they cannot afford it for their children. But they are in the bingo halls weekly spending a lot of money.

 

And as a teacher, I have a real problem with the government allowing (yes I do have a problem with the lottery, too)and then benefitting from something that is a vice and causes problems in the homes of it's citizens.

[ladiesbballcoach]

It is the old story of addiction. Bottom line is that a lot of bad things will happen, but they are already happening online, at tracks, bingo halls, back rooms of pool halls, dog fights, cockfights with bookies, corner dice games and across the river at Indiana casinos. These people with addictions are going to find vice somewhere. By making it legal and monitoring it things are better then where they are going for it already. It is all about personal responsibility. And while I respect that some people have religious objections to it, I don't share those particular religious connections to this activity, and I personally feel that it would be more honest for them to say they don't like because of religious teaching then to try to slide in a social concern angle whose validity was basically destroyed by the Lottery, prohibition, and river boat gambling. I mean Southern Indiana is not my favorite place to hang out, but it is hardly another Las Vegas as far as crime due to river boat gambling. Truth be told it is a lot closer to being like Bullitt county then Vegas.

I can respect a persons religious beliefs about gambling even though I don't share them, but don't feed me a line about social concerns when evidence doesn't support it.

I do have religious objections and don't remember every bringing those into the debate because they do not need to be brought into the debate. There are enough reasons to NOT want gambling without looking at that side of it.

 

On the bolded, so are we going to do that with all the vices in our lives? I think this country would be on a quick downhill, if we adopt the mentality that everything that is negative we legalize so that we can regulate it and somehow convince the country that will make it better.

 

I linked an article several months ago in another gambling thread that said that crime had risen somewhere in INdiana that had a casino. I don't recall which of the towns it was. But I believe it was more DUI's (those result in deaths) from people that would NOT have been in their counties with the casinos. Fraud that the small town police forces were not equipped to deal with was another major problem. Alot of passing of bad checks, etc to get money to gamble, if I remember correctly.

[Fastbreak]

Okay, all arguments about whether gambling is good or bad aside.

 

We have one candidate whose platform for fiscal reform hinges upon allowing outside interests with known ties to organized crime to build luxurious casinos across our state to "legally" suck quarters out of granny's pocketbook. There is no useful product produced. The service provided is "entertainment."

 

The other candidate wants to tap into Kentucky's natural and renewable resources to perfect alternative sources of fuel that would help free the U.S. from our dependency on foreign oil. and establish Kentucky as a world leader in alternative fuels. Kentucky sits atop billons of tons of coal and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that can be rendered into automobile fuel and other uses. Many reclaimed mountaintop mines are ideal for the generation of wind powered electricity. Many Kentucky farmers would benefit from producing biomass sources of fuel from wood scraps, to various crops and grasses including corn. He has also begun to tap the intellectual and technological expertise in our state's universities and research institutions to develop new technologies and the businesses that spring from them.

 

One candidate is in favor of genuine long lasting economic development, the other is promoting an industry that essentially takes money from other parts of the economy and pools it into a form of entertainment.

 

Whether you enjoy casino gaming or not, this should be a no-brainer.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Okay, all arguments about whether gambling is good or bad aside.

 

We have one candidate whose platform for fiscal reform hinges upon allowing outside interests with known ties to organized crime to build luxurious casinos across our state to "legally" suck quarters out of granny's pocketbook. There is no useful product produced. The service provided is "entertainment."

 

The other candidate wants to tap into Kentucky's natural and renewable resources to perfect alternative sources of fuel that would help free the U.S. from our dependency on foreign oil. and establish Kentucky as a world leader in alternative fuels. Kentucky sits atop billons of tons of coal and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that can be rendered into automobile fuel and other uses. Many reclaimed mountaintop mines are ideal for the generation of wind powered electricity. Many Kentucky farmers would benefit from producing biomass sources of fuel from wood scraps, to various crops and grasses including corn. He has also begun to tap the intellectual and technological expertise in our state's universities and research institutions to develop new technologies and the businesses that spring from them.

 

One candidate is in favor of genuine long lasting economic development, the other is promoting an industry that essentially takes money from other parts of the economy and pools it into a form of entertainment.

 

Whether you enjoy casino gaming or not, this should be a no-brainer.

Well if that is true, we know which way the Democrats will vote. :D :sssh:

 

Absolutely, 100% joke and kidding. I am a Democrat.

[Jim Schue]

You've pretty conveniently glossed over or misrepresented a few things here, and with the skill of a junior Karl Rove.

 

Okay, all arguments about whether gambling is good or bad aside.

 

We have one candidate whose platform for fiscal reform hinges upon allowing outside interests with known ties to organized crime to build luxurious casinos across our state to "legally" suck quarters out of granny's pocketbook. There is no useful product produced. The service provided is "entertainment."

 

The mob has been forced out of the casino industry for nearly 30 years. The casino industry now is run by corporations, and to a lesser degree, Indian tribes. Now, if you want to call corporations a form of organized crime, I might could work with that, but that's a whole other discussion.

 

I, and many others, take great entertainment out of gambling. It's fun. Some people like to go to the movies; I like to play the ponies and Texas Hold'Em. If you want to refer to gambling as entertainment, then why is it any different from going to the movies or Kings Island?

 

The other candidate wants to tap into Kentucky's natural and renewable resources to perfect alternative sources of fuel that would help free the U.S. from our dependency on foreign oil. and establish Kentucky as a world leader in alternative fuels. Kentucky sits atop billons of tons of coal and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that can be rendered into automobile fuel and other uses. Many reclaimed mountaintop mines are ideal for the generation of wind powered electricity. Many Kentucky farmers would benefit from producing biomass sources of fuel from wood scraps, to various crops and grasses including corn. He has also begun to tap the intellectual and technological expertise in our state's universities and research institutions to develop new technologies and the businesses that spring from them.

 

One candidate is in favor of genuine long lasting economic development, the other is promoting an industry that essentially takes money from other parts of the economy and pools it into a form of entertainment.

 

Whether you enjoy casino gaming or not, this should be a no-brainer.

 

We shouldn't be looking to substitute the use of one fossil fuel for another. You're still taking razor blades and cutting off the top of the mountains, soiling the streams and air and destroying the beauty of one of our nation's most scenic region. We should be getting away from the use of coal, and its accompanying boom-bust periods and instead conserving what we have.

[Fastbreak]

You've pretty conveniently glossed over or misrepresented a few things here, and with the skill of a junior Karl Rove.

I'm offended Jim... "junior" ??????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Jim Schue]

I'm offended Jim... "junior" ??????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

:laugh: Hey, if you can get a moron elected Governor of Texas and POTUS, you can move up to the big leagues.

[FishTie]

IMHO legalizing gaming in KY will be much like the lottery.....another poor man's tax.......Lets find another way for the government to squeeze another dime from the fixed income crowd.

 

Lets pretend for a second that we live in a society that doesnt currently exist.....one where everyone who visits the new gaming establishment will view it as entertainment only, not a way to "hit the jackpot" and they only wager what they can afford. In this make believe world we dont have to fear the other social issues that many feel will come along with gaming...they simply wont exist. Lets forget all those issues...........What has state government (or federal for that matter) EVER done from the beginning of time til now, that makes you want to put more money in their control?

[HHSDad]

:laugh: Hey, if you can get a moron elected Governor of Texas and POTUS, you can move up to the big leagues.

Clinton was from Arkansas, not Texas.

 

But I digress...

[ram95]

I do have religious objections and don't remember every bringing those into the debate because they do not need to be brought into the debate. There are enough reasons to NOT want gambling without looking at that side of it.

 

On the bolded, so are we going to do that with all the vices in our lives? I think this country would be on a quick downhill, if we adopt the mentality that everything that is negative we legalize so that we can regulate it and somehow convince the country that will make it better.

 

I linked an article several months ago in another gambling thread that said that crime had risen somewhere in INdiana that had a casino. I don't recall which of the towns it was. But I believe it was more DUI's (those result in deaths) from people that would NOT have been in their counties with the casinos. Fraud that the small town police forces were not equipped to deal with was another major problem. Alot of passing of bad checks, etc to get money to gamble, if I remember correctly.

I think that if we legalize and monitor the vice that we are more likely to have less crime. Just like Prohibition on alcohol makes money for mobsters and moonshiners, bans on casinos make money for bookies and mobsters. Bans on drugs have made gangsters rich, cost millions in the war on drugs, and we still have more narcotics problems in the Bible belt of Kentucky then we do in Louisville and Lexington. I think that legalization of many things, with proper taxation and controls, could free up prison space and the lives of kids that make a stupid choice when they are young, increase funds for education and medical coverage, and cut criminals profit margins. I am not quite saying that everything should be legalized, but some legalization of certain gaming and controlled substances will not lead to the end of the U.S., heck it was rum-runners, brewers, distillers and hemp growers that founded it.

 

While I agree that there are some inherent crime increases that will occur, but honestly the crimes that you cite are already occurring here in Louisville and have been forever. I worked at Churchill Downs during my high school years, and I have seen drunks, and I have heard of people cashing bad checks. But that doesn't mean that we should shut down Churchill. Those people made a choice to commit a crime, that is on them, it is sad but that is their choice. We live in a free country and as such we have people that make bad choices all the time and pay a price for it. But it is on them. And we Louisvillians some how seem to live happily amidst such depravity. Again I respect your religious objections, and that is a better argument for me because I live in a city/area (riverboat across the OHIO) with both drinking and gambling and I see much more benefits in terms of entertainment, tax revenue, and tourism then I see criminal activity, it is just that simple to me, I see people do this responsibly and have fun all the time and the horror stories generally are few and far between. So I don't buy into the criminal boogeyman stuff. I am far more swayed by offending the religious objections of a majority of Kentuckians (if that is the case) then I am by the other, because I grew up here, live here gambled responsibly here and I don't see them as a problem that would not still exist without them producing the benefits. :thumb:

 

That is my point of view and while I understand and respect your opinions I doubt we are going to change one an others point of views on this topic. It is going to basically be rooted in value priorities. I grew up in a city with gambling and with a religious background that doesn't view gambling or drinking as inherently bad and in some cases culturally encourage it as long as it is taught and done responsibly. For people that were not brought up to respect the power and responsibility those choices and what the effects can be if you don't, these vices can be overwhelming and should be feared. But that is not my background, so I support it in my community because for the most part it has played a positive, instead of negative role in my life.

[All Tell]

The majority does not always know what is best. If abolishing slavery was put to a vote in the South after Civil War was over, the majority would have voted to keep it.

 

I would think the majority of Americans would vote to abolish income taxes. That would be a horrible thing for this country. Nice for me. Horrible for the country.

I'll remember this when debating public/private with you.