I’m a little surprised that my story from over the weekend about a raid on a gambling house in Hurst is generating so much buzz. Twenty-two comments, at last count, at the bottom of the web story.
To some, it might seem like overkill. A “SWAT team” going in and raiding the place — a house that had been converted into a professional poker operation off Highway 10, also called “Hurst Boulevard.”
Police hauled the 10 organizers and employees to jail and charged them with engaging in organized crime, a felony. The customers got misdemeanor citations, something similar to speeding tickets, and were allowed to leave.
Investigators seized the cards and chips and several large Texas Hold ‘Em tables as evidence. They also recovered about seven thousand dollars in cash.
A victimless crime? Yes and no.
Yes, everyone was there voluntarily. Nobody gets hurt. Police found no drugs or guns in the house.
But no, the argument can be made that the state is the victim. Do you really think the operators paid taxes on their thousands of dollars in profits? Organized gambling, where the house keeps a cut, is against the law.
The debate seems to be whether it really rises to the level of sending in undercover cops and a SWAT team to shut it down. In defense of the police, how else are they going to do it other than simply ignore it? (20-30 cars parked in front of a house every night is hard to ignore.) The cops are just enforcing the law that we as a society passed.
Yes, there are more serious crimes out there. A lot more serious. And police enforce those laws, too.
Think gambling should be legal? Marijuana too? And what about prostitution? Those could also be considered “victimless” crimes. Laws change all the time. Example, prohibition…
So it seems to me that if someone wants to criticize the law, that’s fair game. It’s a lot’s more on target than blasting the cops for doing their jobs.
What do you think?
Gordon Gabs 