Crime Scene – Do Not Cross
Posted by Robb Allen | Filed under Guest Authors, Social Un-Services
(Guest blogger: Robb Allen from Sharp as a Marble)
The one thing that the government does well is punish criminals. The one thing they screw up more than anything is accurately define “crime”
Police in San Mateo County, California apparently first spent months investigating the small-stakes poker game. From this firsthand account, it looks like a couple of the officers were playing regularly for several weeks before sending in the SWAT team, guns drawn, last week. If California is like most states (and I believe it is), a poker game is only illegal if the house is taking a rake off the top. In this case, it looks like that “rake” was the $5 the extra the hosts asked from each buy-in to pay for pizza and beer.
Police also took a 13-year-old girl out of the home, away from her parents, and turned her over to child protective services. In addition to the charge of running an illegal gambling operation, the hosts are also charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Good thing the poor girl was saved before slouching toward an inevitable life of crime.
A crime has a victim and the victim in this story is who, exactly? Nobody showed up and found out that they had to pay some money for beer and food and were held against their will, were they? Did the homeowners pick-pocket their guests?
No, I think you’ll find that it is the State who will claim to be the victim here. You see, any time money changes hands, the Government considers a portion of that transaction to be theirs (call it a “rake”). When the government doesn’t get its share of taxes, it calls foul and does its best to extract the money via other methods.
Of course, this will be spun as “protecting the citizenry from gambling”. The nanny-statists will drool over the chance to prevent people from spending their money as they see fit. They’ll attach ridiculous possibilities and worst-case-scenarios as an excuse to keep that little girl away from her family. And in the process, they will expand their power.
I don’t do poker much. Usually when we play, it’s $20 for buy in, set limits on the pot, then we chip in whatever we can for food & beer, just like this story. And yes, I tend to lose all $20. But I do so voluntarily, and have a blast doing it. It used to be evangelicals that got their panties in a wad if someone was happy, now that role has been switched over to our “betters” in the government.
It’s sad to think that the police department considered a raid on a private poker game to be more important that using that same amount of energy going after the real criminals in our society. Instead, they’re going to ruin many lives (including that little girl’s) to save those same lives. And hey, the money they confiscated from the party? Bonus!
Tags: gambling, government theft, poker, SWAT
Help Support SimonJester.info!
January 15th, 2008
[...] http://thelineishere.org/?p=24 [...]
January 15th, 2008
Robb, thanks for the post. Hazel and I were about to arm wrestle to see who wrote about this story, so thank you for saving me a humiligrating defeat.
January 16th, 2008
I can’t even fathom how any right thinking person would think that a SWAT raid would be the right way to handle this.
The very idea that adults participating in consensual gambling should be regulated is anathema to me, but I can understand how some who think that we all need to be protected from our own darkest corners would feel otherwise. Not that I agree with them, but at least I know where they are coming from. But a full on SWAT raid with a house full of people? Is that wise? Doesn’t that just increase the chances of someone getting shot? Even if this was an illegal operation (with the house getting a take), wouldn’t the best course of action be to shut it down when the patrons aren’t present?
I could go on, everything about this story is wrong, but I won’t. Yet.
January 16th, 2008
The real criminals tend to be armed and to occasionally shoot back.
Much easier to apply force to law-abiding “technical” criminals. Much safer – and more lucrative – for all concerned, too.
January 16th, 2008
Well, not for everyone – the guy getting cuffed for transporting a live lobster in a plastic bag (a felony!) doesn’t get much out of the deal except a nice, small cell to live in.
The funny thing is I’d be as quiet as a mouse if the Government wanted to claim they lowered crime when what they actually did was limit what was considered a crime instead.