Posted by Birmingham News – Alabama’s concerns with Voting Rights law get sympathy from Supreme Court
Birmingham News – Whooping cough outbreak in Walker County, Alabama
Birmingham News – Trussville schools chief voted second raise of 2009
Birmingham News – Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch credit rating agencies say Birmingham’s AA bond rating remains strong
Birmingham News – OUR VIEW: Birmingham officials should have let smoke clear before venturing into electronic bingo
Birmingham News – OUR VIEW: Both hourly and salaried Jefferson County workers should feel pain of pay cuts
Press-Register – Bender moves to rush hearing on bankruptcy sought by creditors
Press-Register – Hot weather ties record in Mobile; not over yet
Press-Register – State GOP may pass on House District 65 race
Press-Register – Feds’ control diminishing
Press-Register – Mock constitution isn’t a scaremonger
Huntsville Times – Askinschoosesnot todebate
Huntsville Times – Jackson hires county administrator
Huntsville Times – Marshall may get $1M for storm cleanup
Huntsville Times – Sessions says missile cuts ‘unacceptable’
Huntsville Times – Acting to avoid a jail repeat
Montgomery Advertiser – Chancellor’s salary target of questions
Montgomery Advertiser – Area residents still struggling with recession
Montgomery Advertiser – Montgomery leaders pledge to unite behind BOE, new superintendent
Montgomery Advertiser – Wetumpka budget raises questions
Montgomery Advertiser – Strange to speak at ASU breakfast
Montgomery Advertiser – Colleges in Alabama become less affordable
Tuscaloosa News – High court ruling invites challenges
Tuscaloosa News – Uncirculated Confederate cash found in courthouse
Florence TimesDaily – Heat illness patients showing up at local hospital
Florence TimesDaily – Law regulates, oversees private sewer companies
Gadsden Times – Mountainboro suit goes back to judge
Gadsden Times – Attorneys for bingo developer file response to Harp
Gadsden Times – Davis remains Boaz’s police chief after council deadlocks in vote
Associated Press – Plantersville soldier killed in Afghanistan
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Did Bob Riley catch the editor of the Birmingham News toe tapping in an airport bathroom? The biased writing over and over again in strong favor of anti-bingo efforts is a bit much to call yourself a creditable paper. Past stories over recent months have been no where close to be balanced. I know already by posting this all the anti-bingo zealots will get on their soap boxes and profess how Alabama is going to hell by allowing such. And newspapers like the Birmingham News ask themselves why people are going to other sources for news. One answer is people want at least some appearance of a paper being balanced.
OUR VIEW: Birmingham officials should have let smoke clear before venturing into electronic bingo
“well duh” lol …must have their kids writing the editorals while they’re out of school…
so there goes the bham news again foaming at the mouth against electronic bingo…maybe they should take a poll and see what the majority of the people want…or just take a look at the polls that have already been taken…
Anon, if you’re referring to the editorial clearly marked “Our View” in the headline, it’s not supposed to be balanced, it’s supposed to reflect the opinion of the editors of the Birmingham News. And if you read the editorial, it’s not so much concern over “going to hell” as it is the fact that all the applications are coming from shady people connected to the politicians who passed the ordinance. Oh yeah, and the fact that these slot machines are probably illegal.
slot machines don’t play against other machines in use…..electronic bingo does….its high time you learn the difference JD…there is damn well a big difference…
Not that anyone cares about the law, but there’s no difference between machines that play against each other and those that don’t, legally speaking. If it’s a slot machine, it’s a slot machine. If it’s not, it’s not. I suppose the court will eventually say. But having machines play against each other makes absolutley no difference in determining whether or not these machines are legal.
The question isn’t whether the machines are playing bingo. The question is do they fit the definition of slot machines as defined by Alabama law.
A slot machine is defined in Section 13A-12-20(10) of the Alabama Code as: “A device that, as a result of the insertion of a coin or other object, operates, either completely automatically or with the aid of some physical act by the player, in such a manner that, depending upon elements of chance, it may eject something of value. A device so constructed or readily adaptable or convertible to such use is no less a slot machine because it is not in working order or because some mechanical act of manipulation or repair is required to accomplish its adaptation, conversion or workability. Nor is it any less a slot machine because apart from its use or adaptability as such it may also sell or deliver something of value on a basis other than chance.”
CC — i’m eagerly awaiting your response. Based on the definition of slot machine in the Alabama Code cited above, what say you?
Does it bother you, CC, when the brother of a city councilman and Earl Hilliard, who admitted he wrote the ordinance and told councilman Montgomery to sponsor it, are the first two hogs at the trough? It bothers me. Gives some credibility to the argument that gambling leads to corruption, doesn’t it.
Jinks, you seem to have a better grasp on this than I do, is there any merit to the argument that some constitutional amendment out there trumps the statute you cited? Otherwise, the statute couldn’t be more clear.
so who dropped the the ball when it comes to victoryland???
fair to say then politics leads to corruption JD….
Many do argue that the local CAs somehow trump this law, and I can certainly understand why people would believe that given the basic nature of constitutional amendments versus statutes.
But as far as I know, nothing in any of the local CAs does anything to exempt the operation of bingo from the state’s law against slot machines. The local CAs exempt counties from the statute outlawing lotteries and other games of chance. Bingo is a lottery.
on other issues in other states judges have ruled that a constutional amendment does in fact trump state laws….
as i have always said, this should be left up to each county to decide if they want it or not…the federal goverment has already trumped state law by allowing the indians to operate here….its here and it will always be here..lets tax it, regulate it and create a good gaming commission and be done with it….
I’ve heard the solitaire analogy used before, so I’ll offer my version…
Imagine all card games were illegal. For whatever reason, poker, blackjack, and solitaire are all against the law to play becasue card games are illegal.
Then imagine computers are also illegal. For whatever reason, it’s against the law to posess a computer.
Then we pass a CA authorizing the game of solitaire in Montgomery County. Does that mean you can play solitaire on a computer? No. It doesn’t because computers are illegal, remember?
As I see it, it’s not a question of whether or not you can play bingo. It’s a question of whether or not you can play bingo on a machine that seems to fit the description of a illegal gambling device.
now lets imagine only the indians are allowed to have computers in our state…..are you ok with that? i’m not…
Maybe, JD Crowe’s Editoral Cartoon might remind us until the Legislature meets again, bingo is a secondary issue.
sorry walt..i’ve seen too many of his so-called cartoons on troy king to even want to click on his site…
CC – the whole argument of “electronic bingo is OK because you play against each other and not the house” is laughable. That is straight out of ronnie gilley’s mouth. rationalize it all you want – it is gambling. it is a slot machine. if it walks and quacks like a duck….it’s a duck. be for it or against it but don’t act like it is not typical slot machine gambling because that you don’t play against the house. that whole idea to market it is not gambling is…well….ducked up…
thanks for that link, walt. I hadn’t seen that. The desire for freedom is fundamental. It knows no race, creed or border.
CC – Looks like they are ganging up on you. I don’t know where in the law it says so, but state law definitely states that a machine used in the playing of a lottery is not a slot machine, and state law says that bingo is a lottery. So, if you are playing bingo on a machine, the machine cannot be a slot machine. The constitutional amendments that allow bingo are exceptions to the constitution’s ban of lotteries, therefore, bingo is a legal lottery in the locations where it is allowed by constitutional amendment, and therefore, the machines are not slot machines – they are legal lottery machines. Maybe you can get someone to find that language in the Alabama Code. It is there.
Glad to have some of our 9 supreme court justices take time to post here and enlighten us on the Alabama Code, since those are the only 9 views that matter.
But their posting here under screen names will not change anything, I guess we’ll have to wait until they announce their ruling in Montgomery
no reason to even talk of this as it will be decided by the AL Supreme Court….. as it should be.
Bunch of crap responses from those of you who make up your judicial philosophy on the fly. Today you are for strict jurists and tomorrow you still want strict jurists but you hint, hint and nudge them under the table that it is ok this one time to rewrite the law. A lot of you are reading way more into the short definition of slot machine. Lets all remember both lawyers and politicians make their living interpreting the law to what they think it is and if they don’t agree they try to convince a judge otherwise or have a legislative body rewrite the law. Let the Supreme Court tug of war begin. I challenge everyone here to remember whatever the outcome the Riley bunch will be outed at some point for their indian ways. And, just let them work to influence this ruling because their fingerprints will be all over it and once the smoking gun is found to be in the GOP’s hands it will be debits all day long against the grand ole hypocritical party. Lets all go pray to God to give the GOP strength to save us from ourselves. The Gov. I am sure won’t go to hell for supporting full blown Vegas gambling in Mississippi since he is working to keep it out of Alabama. And of course Alabama is more important in the eyes of God than Mississippi.
Hoss, I would be very interested to find that statute. Seems to me that if that is the case, Milton and Gilley Inc. would’ve brought it up a long time ago. And Troy King for that matter.
Jinks – A lawyer friend told me about it a couple of months ago during a discussion of what we thought the Supreme Court would do with a case challenging the machines. His opinion was that the statute would result in a Supreme Court ruling that the machines are legal as long as they are playing a lottery game, i.e. bingo. I will email him tonight and try to get the location of the statute and post it for you.
bingo, hoss man….exactly why victoryland is still in operation….time to get all this behind us and move on to all those “much more important things” some of you guys keep talking about….but quite frankly i will miss all the back and forths….in case you couldn’t tell, i have come to enjoy it…
btw..check out how the george jones possum holler bed and breakfast is coming along on this video….http://countrycrossingprogress.blogspot.com/you will all see that Country Crossing is really going to be a nice addition to our area…hopefully everyone will see that it was something well worth fighting for….
the george jones possum holler b and b – wow – a coveted destination indeed.
lol..wait for the finished product, mr. dic…
Jinks – per your request, the language from Alabama Code 13A-12-20: (5) GAMBLING DEVICE. Any device, machine, paraphernalia or equipment that is normally used or usable in the playing phases of any gambling activity, whether that activity consists of gambling between persons or gambling by a person involving the playing of a machine. However, lottery tickets, policy slips and other items used in the playing phases of lottery and policy schemes are not gambling devices within this definition.
Interesting, Hoss. I read that a little differently than you, I suppose. To me, that emphatically states that the device used to play the lottery is, in fact, a gambling device, but the insignificant items like tickets aren’t. It’s like a lottery ticket machine is a gambling device, not the lottery ticket, which makes sense.
Don’t take this personally, but by your logic, a lotto ticket system that rewards winners with money is completely legal in Alabama because all the items involved in the playing of a lottery aren’t gambling devices.
In any case, I really don’t see how that definition could be construed to exempt a machine that plays a lottery from the law against slot machines.
As for everyone else spewing on the internets today, I think this is exactly the kind of issue the supreme court should be taking up. I’m not against gambling. I think slot machines are stupid, but I like a good game of poker. However, I am against the making of law by default. It seems clear to me that Alabama has very consistent prohibition of gambling. The exceptions for bingo that have been made don’t even come close to justifying the use of the kind of machines we’re talking about. And people voting on those CAs certainly weren’t aware they were legalizing of the kinds of machines we’re talking about.
If we’re going to legalize casinos, it has to be done the right way. The whole Troy King let’s vote to ban gambling even though it’s already illegal doesn’t make sense to me.
Jinks – I see your point and the Supreme Court may agree with you. Actually, when I first read the statute I followed your logic completely, but my lawyer friend took it another step, with which I agreed: The constitution’s ban on lotteries is trumped by the local constitutional amendment – therefore, where it is allowed bingo is a lottery – a machine that plays a lottery game cannot be a slot machine. It seems to me (non-lawyer) that the Supreme Court will not be able to manuever around this. I, too, disagree with King that the answer is a statewide constitutional amendment to ban all forms of gambling or just keep the status quo. Instead, we should be allowed to vote on whether to completely ban it, or, to allow it with strict controls, regulations, and heavy taxation. I do agree with King that hustling the issue to the Supreme Court is judicial activism no less than the issues of abortion and gun control. Let the whole state decide, not nine elected politicians.