I swore I wouldn't reply; I think we've hit a pearls before swine situation.
But I am curious, Boz, why are you asking? Are you considering a trip to MO, or are you just arguing for the sake of the argument? Do you actually care about Missouri gaming laws?
IMHO, it's whatever. You asked, myself and several others answered. Believe what you want.
...mike drop...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by RCJH; 06-16-2016 at 09:45 PM.
Why are you mad that I don't believe in things I read in the Internet? I wanted to know because I was curious. I'm not trying to prove that Missouri bans counters. I assumed that it probably was illegal, but no one has anything but opinion so far, except for maybe Ryemo. Nothing you can point to in the law that says "counters can't be banned". Some stuff says they take countermeasures. Some stuff that says there's a presumption that a random person shouldn't be banned if he isn't disruptive. I see nothing, you guys see a treasure trove.Originally Posted by RCJH
Seriously, is there a reason why I must believe opinions based on links to homepages and misapplications of law? Am I doing harm to AP's business in Missouri? If no one knew, they didn't have to answer. And I probably wouldn't have talked to myself. Unless I was high at the time--don't expect me to remember.
Last edited by Boz; 06-16-2016 at 10:34 PM.
Man you are dense and pigheaded. It says you can only be barred for cheating or disruptive behavior. Counting is neither. Therefore you can't be barred for counting. They can send someone to get you to engage them in a disruptive way. It won't matter who started things. But you will be barred for the disruption not counting.
Relax Boz (or should I say: "Lighten up Francis").
The point of my original post was simply to learn more about this subject by soliciting comments on a theory that, based on the way the Ohio law is written, it appears that one could not be legally ejected for card counting alone. ZMF was quick to point out that he was ejected from an Ohio casino for nothing more than card counting. That is exactly the type of on-point commentary that I was looking for. I also appreciate the analysis of the MO law.
From this thread, I've learned that the Ohio law is not written quite as strongly as the MO law in that it does not explicitly contain a presumptive right of access to table games. That being said, I still think that based on the way the Ohio law is written, a casino would have a hard time justifying the ejection of a patron purely for card counting. Of course, that doesn't mean that they won't do it as ZMF has testified, and I agree that only a "doofus" would ever bother challenging this in court. But if they did, my money would be on the doofus...
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks