TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Steven Harper and Barrack Obama broke the law publically?

Steven Harper and Barrack Obama broke the law publically?

Ok not sure if anyone here remembers how the US president had to supply a case of beer to the PM over a bet with PM Steven Harper.

Gambling in Canada/Ontario is generally illegal, and the PM bet for something that was a tangible good with a retail value.

Simply put both him and Barrack Obama and Steven Harper violated Canadian laws.. the President as a head of state would generally be automatically exempt from Charges in Canada.. but the PM of Canada has no direct protections from violations of criminal law in Canada - he broke his own countries laws, and he has no immunity since he isn't head of state.

Should he be charged - would the attorney general be obliged to use their powers to cancel the case extrajudicially?


Should the PM face jail time?

Is it right for a coutnry to let their leaders break the law for publicity, or should it be frowned upon?

This is not an important issue. Health Care, the economy, and the War in Afghanistan are important issues.

nobody gives a shit ********. not to mention you're wrong.

quote:

FORMS OF GAMBLING LEGAL IN CANADA Ticket lotteries, horse racing, and charitable gaming (including bingo) are currently legal in all ten provinces, Yukon Territory, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut Territory (but not offered in all jurisdictions). Casino-style gaming is available in all provinces with the exception of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland & Labrador. Provincial electronic gaming policy in Canada makes a distinction between slot machines and VLTs (Video Lottery Terminals). Slot machines are usually found in casinos and at racetracks, and are available in all provinces with the exception of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland & Labrador. VLTs are available in all provinces but Ontario and British Columbia. Private bets between individuals who are not engaged in the business of betting is permitted under Section 204 of the Criminal Code. Internet Gambling is not featured among the legalized gambling offerings in Canada.

http://www.abgaminginstitute.ualber...g_in_Canada.pdf

Also, really, William? You want the Prime Minister to go to jail over a bet involving a case of beer? You need to lay off the mushrooms dude.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN nobody gives a shit ********. not to mention you're wrong. http://www.abgaminginstitute.ualber...g_in_Canada.pdf

"Common gaming house": This is where people are enabled to conduct gaming against a second party. Take Home Craps, for example, where individual players play against the host, or House. When somebody's home is used to for somebody to arrange a game where he or she collects and pays bets, it falls under this definition. Some home gamblers refer to a 'rake', where the host collects a small percentage of all pots to help pay for hosting expenses. Use of 'rakes' also falls under this category.


Who hosted the olympics?


Section 199 (sub-sections 1-7) outlines the procedure in dealing with a disorderly house.


They organized and paid for the game.. and bet on the game..

and had a money's worth return in a case of beer.

I know you are saying so what.. but it meets the criteria for breach of the criminal code of Canada.

you really are a stupid fuck. have you ever been wrong about anything? everytime somebody owns your stupid ass you invent some retarded bollocks instead of admitting you got it wrong.

it says it plain as fucking day.

quote:

Private bets between individuals who are not engaged in the business of betting is permitted under Section 204 of the Criminal Code.

fuck you.

Seriously. Who gives a fuck. Unless BO was snorting coke off of the PMs wife I don't really give a shit.

And *poof*... William disappears.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you really are a stupid fuck. have you ever been wrong about anything? everytime somebody owns your stupid ass you invent some retarded bollocks instead of admitting you got it wrong. it says it plain as fucking day. fuck you.

1. A private bet is not public.
2. A private bet isn't conducted by the same person in charge of the event.
3. Whether it is money or money's worth doesn't matter it is one and the same.
4. It is not a "gift" because it exactly involves what is called gambling and gaming. What is called placing a stake on an event. In this case the PM helped faciliate the games - making them co-operator, and the one specifically taking part in the bet itself.
5. The PM was at the actual event, which is also an offence.


Lets take this from a different perspective.


CEO of baseball team, takes a bet with other people on the outcome of their sports team game. They bet 500$ and accept a return bet for 500$ if the other team wins they will pay out. This is not only taken, but it is advertised on all major media networks (another criminal offence to advertise or market gaming and gambling - illegal in Canada).

His company operated the same games he bet on.

The only legal gambling of this form in Canada are licensed organizations such as horse race tracks, licensed bingo halls, and licensed casinos etc.. people cannot just organize a betting game - it is illegal without being licensed. It is illegal to bet on games where money or money's worth is bet.. prize matches are a special class of events - and the PM was not in a position to take a prize from the game.

This was also not a "gift" it was a proceed of an illegal bet.

This is "illegal" not only for facilitating organization of the game including spending a lot of money - it represents not only a conflict of interest but a criminal and illegal act - which is contrary the ethics of a parliamentarian, not only to support gambling practices but advertise them - contrary to the law and in abuse of their position.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you really are a stupid fuck.

please tell us why you're the only person on the whole fucking planet that thinks this was illegal?

How fucking low is your IQ?

quote:

Originally posted by ******** 1. A private bet is not public.

We know, this bet was a private bet between individuals. In this case, between Stephen Harper and Barrack Obama

quote:

2. A private bet isn't conducted by the same person in charge of the event.

Neither Stephen Harper or Barrack Obama were in charge of the event. The Olympics is owned and run by the IOC.

quote:

3. Whether it is money or money's worth doesn't matter it is one and the same.

Irrelevant, it was a legal, private bet between individuals.

quote:

4. It is not a "gift" because it exactly involves what is called gambling and gaming. What is called placing a stake on an event. In this case the PM helped faciliate the games - making them co-operator, and the one specifically taking part in the bet itself.

You're right, it was a bet. A legal bet. Because it was a private bet between individuals.

quote:

5. The PM was at the actual event, which is also an offence.

No it isn't. He doesn't own or run Team Canada, Hockey Canada, or the Olympic games. Neither does Obama own Team USA, Hockey USA, or the Olympic games. It was a legal bet, and Stephen Harper won fair and square!

How's your job-hunting going? Assault any more store clerks or doctors lately?

It would only be a private bet if the money to buy the beer came out of Obama's pocket...if he expensed the cost of the beer then I wouldn't consider it a bet between two individuals but a bet between two countries. If its illegal or not....it's wrong for the president and prime minister to gamble with tax payers money.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.