A Casino Can Prohibit
- A Casino Can Prohibit
- A Casino Can Prohibit One
- A Casino Can Prohibit Enter
- A Casino Can Prohibit Which Of The Following
- A Casino Can Prohibit Who
- A Casino Can Prohibit Discrimination
The Portuguese government has introduced legislation that could lead to a ban on online casino during the coronavirus state of emergency. If enacted, a partial or total prohibition of customers accessing online casinos could be introduced.
In an amendment to law 10-I/ 2020, legislators have inserted a clause which allows for “partial or total limitations on access to online gambling are established until the end of the period relating to the state of emergency, with a view to protecting consumers”.
The wording of the amendment does not explain in which situation the prohibition could be introduced or clarify what the difference between a partial or total ban would look like. It is however believed that any measures brought in would apply to online casino activity.
- If you’re in a casino, you can assume you’re being watched. “Casinos are very well-covered with surveillance cameras,” says Derk. “Once someone arrives at our property, if we needed to.
- The decision to prohibit any activity should be based on a thorough analysis of costs and benefits. Gambling industry should be regulated in the same way as other activities, without taking into consideration the pretentious and contradictory arguments of morality, or as a result of discrimination in relation to a particular social class.
- A casino can prohibit which of the following from being inside the casino? Someone 21 who appears younger. A group of 6 people who congregate together at a black jack table. Someone who is gambling a few dollars every hour but accepting free drinks.
Initially, online sports betting was included in the government’s 326/XIV/1 bill last month. However, the Portuguese authorities removed all mention of fixed-odds sports betting due to the cancellation of almost all sporting events globally.
These proposals are a precautionary measure by the Portuguese authorities who fear that the country’s lockdown measures could lead to “unlimited and uncontrolled” access to online gambling sites from residents. Officials have voiced concerns that individuals may exhibit less impulse control and could be drawn into gambling. According to regulators, the financial impact of the Covid-19 outbreak could also entice individuals to gamble money they cannot afford to lose.
56 Also, there is nothing to prohibit a domestic casino parent or headquarters corporation and/or its domestic casino affiliates, branches, or places of business from consulting with affiliated casinos licensed in other countries before a SAR form is filed concerning customer accountholder activity that is occurring among them. As we all now that casino is private property, they can restrict or prohibit anything they want. However, in the given case, a card counter could be prohibited by the Casino because if the card counter is the type of electronic device then the entry of card counting could be restricted because this device is likely to give an advantage to the player or to the dealer.
It is believed that the proposal to restrict or potentially ban participation at online casinos is just one of several plans that the Portuguese authorities are considering during the outbreak. However, further details on what these measures consist of, and what verticals they could affect, are not known at this time.
The vagueness of the wording, along with the lack of detail in the legislation, has led to criticism of the government’s proposals. Tiago Bessa, who is a managing associate at Portuguese law firm Vieira De Almeida, is one of those who have voiced concerns with the plans. Claiming current rules are already sufficient, she said:
I can understand the concern from the public authorities on this matter, but most of the topics that the law/regulation intend to cover could already be addressed under existing legal mechanisms. It does not seem like a necessary measure at this stage– Tiago Bessa, Vieira De Almeida.
Bessa added that the government’s plans were “not well-worded and raised a lot of legal concerns” and said she felt that a total ban would prove to be unenforceable. Any restrictions placed on online casinos is likely to impact operators hard, especially as casino revenue is the only source of income for many due to the lack of sporting action caused by the spread of the coronavirus.
The Portuguese market before the outbreak had been one of the strongest performing markets in western Europe. In figures released by the regulator (SRIJ), gross gaming revenue rose 39.1% year-on-year during Q3 2019 to €54m.
Online casino revenue was a contributory factor in the overall rise, revenues of €28.2m up from 19.2m represent a 45.2% increase in 2018’s figures. Players in the country staked €741.5m on online casino sites during Q3, which is a 33.8% upturn on the previous year.
Home > Online Casinos > Casino Articles > Winning A Casino Jackpot
Gamblers in the US have three levels of laws to contend with. First, there's Federal law, such as UIGEA, which limit how Americans can do business with gambling websites. Then there's state law, maybe the most contentious legal arena for gamblers, a set of fifty unique rules and regulations based only on what set of borders you're gambling inside. Further down the totem pole, there are county and municipal laws, not as big a problem for bettors as Federal or state, but still a relevant issue in some parts of the country.
The list of states below represents the ten most oppressive sets of gaming laws in the US. Unlike some of our other lists, this one is in a particular order. It starts with the worst offender, the deeply-conservative and religious state of Utah. The list ends with the seemingly progressive but increasingly anti-gambling state of Wisconsin, moving from the absolute worst set of laws to a set that are almost-tolerable.
1. Utah
Casinos: 0
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Legal
You can't gamble legally anywhere in Utah - not in the privacy of your home, not at any sort of casino, not even in a game of bingo or a raffle. One of few states with a specific law against Internet betting, Utah has also taken the unique step of opting out of any future federal legalization of gambling. State lawmakers are so paranoid about the prospect of gaming that they've make a pre-emptive strike against some mythical future decision of the federal government. If you live in Utah and want to gamble, you pretty much have to drive 90 minutes to Nevada.
2. Hawaii
Casinos: 0
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Specified
You don't often hear Utah and Hawaii mentioned in the same breath – one is largely white, Republican, and hyper-religious, and the other is Hawaii. But when it comes to laws against gambling, you can't beat the one-two punch of Utah and the Aloha State. Hawaii hasn't acted yet to outlaw online gambling, but it's only a matter of time. Both voters and lawmakers in the state consistently say in polls (and in votes) that casino gambling would be a blight on the state's natural beauty. Proponents of gambling in the islands say that each casino would bring about $20 million in new revenue each year. Anti-gambling forces point out that Hawaii's tourism industry brings in about $1 billion a year already, so an extra $20 million isn't worth the additional crime, pollution, traffic, and other downsides of the gaming industry. The fight continues – but for now, you just can't gamble in Hawaii without breaking the law.
3. Indiana
Casinos: 1
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Legal
Online Gambling: Not Legal
There's a casino in French Lick where you can play slots and table games. But if you want to play those games elsewhere in the state, you'll have to head to a riverboat, pay an entry fee, and play (let's face it) inferior games in an inferior setting. Aside from the land-based games in French Lick, Indiana's overly-broad definition of gambling and overly-harsh penalties for the act of illegal gambling (which is a felony on a first offense in most cases) make it a very un-friendly state for people who bet. The state has explicitly outlawed social and private gambling, even if your own home, and while daily fantasy sports betting is protected by state law (when you study US gaming law you get used to hypocrisy), you are technically committing a crime if you play online poker, blackjack, slots, or any other gambling game.
4. Tennessee
Casinos: 0
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Specified
Tennessee makes the list because it's never really renovated the harsh gaming laws that every US state put in practice in the 19th and early 20th centuries. While other states that were once dead-set against casino gambling have gone on to host massively-profitable gambling industries (we're looking at you, New Jersey and Pennsylvania), Tennessee lawmakers never moved to regulate or allow any form of gambling. The only bit of leniency implied by state law is its failure to address online gambling in general, though Tennessee's AG did wake up long enough to band daily fantasy sports bets. Most Tennessee citizens do their gambling in Mississippi. Wouldn't it be nice to keep that money in the state coffers in Nashville?
5. Alaska
Casinos: 0
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Specified
Online Gambling: Not Specified
Literally the only way for an Alaskan to play a traditional casino game, slot machine, or video poker machine is to drive into Canada or get on a plane and land in some other US state. You could argue that the state's lack of desire to outlaw DFS or online gambling is a de facto legalization of those activities, but in a state where a second gambling offense is a felony, do you really want to test the court with that defense?
6. New Hampshire
Casinos: 0
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Specified
Online Gambling: Not Legal
The New Hampshire House and Senate have been at war for about a decade over the issue of casino legalization. The House has presented two legitimate bills to the Senate for their approval – one would have allowed the construction of two casinos in the state, the other proposed just one commercial gaming property. The Senate couldn't stomach either bill. The state has already outlawed online gambling, and is moving to make DFS bets illegal as well. Don't place wagers on a private poker game or March Madness pool in the state – you're breaking the law and eligible for a surprisingly-tough misdemeanor charge. The only saving grace for gamblers in New Hampshire is that they're close to regulated gambling options in Massachusetts and New York.
7. Georgia
Casinos: 1 (casino cruise ship)
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Specified
Georgia's gaming law is the epitome of the Deep South's attitude towards most vice – they don't like it, they don't want you to like it, and they don't plan on doing much about it. The state's one legitimate gambling option is a small 'casino cruise' with a few table games, gaming machines, and a tiny sportsbook and bar. Georgia lawmakers appear poised to outlaw all forms of online gambling, as they've recently moved to make daily fantasy sports wagers illegal under the state's broad definition of gambling.
8. Texas
Casinos: 1 (tribal)
Social Gambling: Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Legal
A Casino Can Prohibit
The fact that the massive and densely-populated state of Texas has just one rinky-dink tribal casino to its credit is a crime. Sure, citizens can play most games in the privacy of their home, and the existence of 'game rooms' featuring slots and electronic versions of table games is well-documented, but now that lawmakers have been forced to declare DFS betting illegal, it seems likely that the state also consider all forms of Web-based betting unlawful. One of the reasons Texas makes the list is the sheer unlikeliness of big changes to the state's draconian position on gambling in the near-future.
9. Florida
Casinos: 8
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Legal
Online Gambling: Not Specified
A Casino Can Prohibit One
Don't get busted placing a wager on a DFS game or playing a private poker game – a first offense is a tough misdemeanor, and a second offense is a felony. We think it's just a matter of time before Florida law is altered to include a provision against Web-based gambling, to protect the state's limited tribal gaming industry.
10. Wisconsin
A Casino Can Prohibit Enter
Casinos: 24 (tribal)
A Casino Can Prohibit Which Of The Following
Social Gambling: Not Legal
DFS Bets: Not Specified
A Casino Can Prohibit Who
Online Gambling: Not Specified
A Casino Can Prohibit Discrimination
How does a state with two-dozen casinos earn a spot on this list? State lawmakers are constantly acting to outlaw new forms of gambling – that means in recent years Wisconsin citizens have lost the right to gamble in their private homes or businesses, and lawmakers have even specifically outlawed online gambling. Now they're working overtime to ban daily fantasy sports betting. Yes, tribal gaming options in the state are adequate, but lawmakers are consistently moving in the direction of prohibition. Soon, the only way to place any sort of bet in the state will be in a venue where the state can earn their tax share.