Congressmen in Wonderland

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 09 Nov 2001 07:31:00 GMT

FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED NOV. 8, 2001
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
Congressmen in Wonderland
Committee vows to ban Internet gaming, then orders tide not to rise

With federal buildings in Washington closing down, musical-chairs fashion, in response to the ongoing anthrax terror campaign, and the undeclared war in Afghanistan escalating (the press being extremely careful not to call the hundreds of Americans now on the ground by the term "military advisers," with all its Vietnam-era resonance), it's understandable that the attention of Congress now focuses, more than ever, on matters of pressing national concern.

Like a ban on Internet gaming.

Did Osama bin Laden finance Al-Qaida's activities by wagering against the Yankees in the Series? No such evidence has been presented, yet the House Financial Services Committee voted 34-18 on Oct. 31 to virtually ban Internet gaming in the United States by outlawing payments for online wagers via credit cards, checks, or electronic fund transfers.

Banks and credit card companies would be obliged by law -- under this and a companion measure -- to "make a good faith effort to discontinue processing transactions to or from specific unlawful Internet gambling businesses," asserts Rep. Mike Oxley, R-Ohio, who then absurdly attempts to assure those institutions this won't "unduly burden" them.

This shows about as much comprehension of how easy it is to stop the movement of money on the Internet -- or to track how it's being used -- as medieval attempts to make it illegal to turn a telescope skyward and use it to view the stars.

This is akin to admitting the government can't actually stop folks from smoking marijuana -- and instead threatening to jail those who sell plastic sandwich bags later used to store, transport of consume the stuff ... while assuring SC Johnson that being required to track the end use of every Ziploc bag won't "burden them unduly."

Going a step further down the road to Wonderland, Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, then thundered, "Not to bring (Internet gambling) down is to say one supports unregulated gambling."

Really? So by failing to end something, a congressman reveals that he supports it? Can we thus conclude that -- since Rep. Leach has (thankfully) not taken any steps that we know of to jail all homosexuals -- he "supports sodomy"?

While Rep. John LaFalce, D-N.Y., adds: "Beware, because whether this bill passes or not, I'm going to suggest to every single bankruptcy court in America that any debtor who incurred debt due to Internet gambling be discharged from that debt because you, the credit card companies, have aided and abetted an illegal activity!"

Good one, John. And we also won't have to pay back our bank loans if we can show we blew it all on cocaine and ladies of easy acquaintance, right? After all, the bank "should have known." And what about gun stores? Surely Sens. Feinstein and Schumer will want to warn the banks they won't be able to collect if they finance gun stores. Where does the line form? How about if I go broke manufacturing radar detectors? Do I also get one of the "All Debts Forgiven -- Get Out of Jail Free" cards?

Those who defraud Internet users by failing to pay off should be pursued under existing laws against fraud and confidence games. Protecting consumers from scam artists sited overseas does indeed present a challenge -- the best solution may well turn out to be standard warnings of "caveat emptor," combined with rigorous enforcement of brand-name and copyright protections which allow consenting adults to know they're dealing with a reputable casino ... like the ones listed in the Las Vegas or Reno yellow pages.

But blocking consenting adults from spending their money "unwisely" over the Internet? Will the committee next investigate whether anyone really "needs" the kind of stuff being sold by Sharper Image or those stuck-up, European types at eLuxury.com?

Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Subscribe to his monthly newsletter by sending $72 to Privacy Alert, 561 Keystone Ave., Suite 684, Reno, NV 89503 -- or dialing 775-348-8591. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at 1-800-244-2224, or via web site www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.

Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com

"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926)

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken

Add comment Edit post Add post

Previous Posts:
House blocks vast new airport bureaucracy
Take a Break
No Time Today
Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss
Los Angeles Policeman of the World
'Students' of death
Free Market Solves Airline Security Problem
Trick or Treat
The End of Due Process in Amerika
USA "Patriot" Act Passes House, TRT Recruiting

Navigation

History

Quotes

Government doesn't work. Never did. Never will. Can't. But there are lots of good people. Love them.

-- Bill St. Clair

The Atlanta Declaration

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

-- L. Neil Smith

Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings.

-- L. Neil Smith

A Penalty Clause for the Bill of Rights

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

-- L. Neil Smith

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

-- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report on gun control laws.

Who is a libertarian?

Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap")

"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."

-- L. Neil Smith

(Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP")

Why Did It Have to be... Guns?

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

-- L. Neil Smith

Concise

"Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

-- Mike Vanderboegh

Also from The Atlanta Declaration:

... like going to the bathroom, breathing, eating, sleeping, or making love, it turns out that self-defense is a bodily function one cannot safely or effectively delegate to a second party.

-- L. Neil Smith

This does not mean that "Marijuana should be available by prescription." It means that morphine sulfate should be available in five pound bags at the supermarket for a couple of bucks, like sugar... but probably in a different aisle, to avoid confusion.

-- Vin Suprynowicz

If you refuse to pay unjust taxes, your property will be confiscated. If you attempt to defend your property, you will be arrested. If you resist arrest, you will be clubbed. If you defend yourself against clubbing, you will be shot dead. These procedures are known as the Rule of Law.

-- Edward Abbey

The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war.

-- Bill St. Clair