More Tax Money to control gambling

[The Watchdog]

http://www.globegazette.com/articles...d770492737.txt


Ok...

Money for feeding the homeless?? Nahh.. lets stop gambling...

Money for building shelters??? Nahh lets stop gambling...

Money for increasing studying options??? Nahh ... lets stop gambling...

Money for sending more people to destroy middle east and take their oil?? Yes.. but lets save some to stop gambling ....


Ok.. everytime I learn about gambling late news I get scared about how much money they are investing on this non-priority matter.

[rtmlam]

http://www.globegazette.com/articles...d770492737.txt


Ok...

Money for feeding the homeless?? Nahh.. lets stop gambling...

Money for building shelters??? Nahh lets stop gambling...

Money for increasing studying options??? Nahh ... lets stop gambling...

Money for sending more people to destroy middle east and take their oil?? Yes.. but lets save some to stop gambling ....

Ok.. everytime I learn about gambling late news I get scared about how much money they are investing on this non-priority matter.

Here we go again.......

Watchdog, Once again you really seem to be going off the "deep end". Your disdain for the US (or is it just the US government) never ceases to amaze me. While funding for legitamite issues such as homelessness, hunger, etc. is always subject to debate please put this in perspective.

This is the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation tasked to investigate criminal activity. With the number of casinos and additional newly opened casinos the increased staffing does not seem completely unreasonable to me. Like it or not criminal activity tends to migrate where " the money" and "easy victims" are. Providing law enforcement to help protect law-abiding citizens that want to use these facilities is hardly a "non-priority matter" in my opinion. As the article states:

"The DCI handled 461 criminal cases involving incidents at riverboats and racetracks in 2005, with incidents ranging from disorderly conduct and forgeries to sexual assaults and gambling violations."

Why would you consider it a negative to assure these facilities operate within the boundaries of the law? Is it not a good idea to apprehend forgers, sexual predators and the like?

The article further states:

"Additional agents assigned to casinos around the state have helped the DCI to improve its response to major crimes, Diaz said, because agents can be used to back up the forces at local crime scenes. No agents are being diverted from major crime cases to work at casinos, he said."

If major crimes are most prevalent surrounding the casinos, the statement above makes sense to me. More statistics would have to be looked at to confirm/deny any possible diversion of staff from other crime cases.

I for one would welcome sufficient criminal enforcement/investigation at any land based casinos I may visit to assure my experience there would not turn into a nightmare. I would be surprised if other areas with land based casino's such as Vegas did not have similar ratios related to criminal investigation staffing.

Oh yeah, and this statement of yours...

"Money for sending more people to destroy middle east and take their oil?? Yes.. but lets save some to stop gambling ...."

You must be kidding making comparisons of funding for the war and a state criminal investigative unit.

Get real..............

[The Watchdog]

Sorry to piss you.. you have some of truth on what you said and I admit it.

Is just that instead of doing that.. .why the hell did they allowed all those casino's to open??

First.. that crap about casinos helping the community is just a lot of BS... the only thing that casino expantion does is to increase the amount of compulsive gamblers, therefore increasing the amount of GA groups...

Is true.. it might generate a lot of jobs. But even the article states and criticize why are they focusing on this instead of looking for child abusers, drug problems, terrorists, pcp labs.. whatever...

I am sorry if you dislike my threads.. Feel more than welcome to send an email for the forum moderator to ban me for good. I won't complain from his decision. If you don't like my threads, I can see you live in Florida.. is a free country, No one is pointing you a gun to your head to read them.

Anytime you see a link a I put here, no worries, I won't get recented if you don't read those articles (which I believe) are from US papers...

Anyways, I don't mean to become your enemy or start a discussion over this... I strongly agree that is stupid to have agents on this area than on other more important areas.

Regarding my comparison with the middle east issue.. You are so right.. stupid comparisson... sorry I suffer from a mental divergent disorder...

They are not there to stop gambling.. they are there to make sure gambling is done honestly... What ever that means.

If a guy gambles their children's meals and college funds I don't see how they are going to prevent that. I find that very dishonest. If they are focusing on the operators odds or business, what a waste of time.

Is true.. sorry I got out of focus on the matter...

However if they didn't want to deal with these situations why did they allowed land based casinos on the first place on that state. More than a beneffit it has become a hassle.

Never the less.. its still a waste of efforts and money. This time not oriented to the online gambling industry but to the land based one.

Casinos will never be a positive thing (online or landbased).. thats a fact. If they allowed it because they thought it will be something positive; they shouldn't be investing money now to control what they thought they could.

At least on online gambling you don't need 24 hour surveillance. If someone chooses to make business with a money laundring, criminal organization is because of lack of knowledge and research.

[spearmaster]

If you read closely, you will see that all applicants are sent straight to the Gaming Bureau because that is now considered the entry-level position. Obviously people will also graduate out of this area into the other areas in time.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with this at all, although of course I can also see how it could be taken the other way.