Here’s the Drew Carey video. It’s on the Dallas police department’s dumb decision to raid a VFW hall that was hosting poker games. This one was one of my suggestions. I think it came out very well.

Via “Lloyd” in the comments section below, the U.S. is claiming it can kidnap British citizens suspected of violating U.S. law, then whisk them back to America for trial—all without permission from the British government.

I realize the first thing people think of with extraordinary rendition is terrorism, and getting terror suspects out of countries with unfriendly governments. But don’t forget, this is the same administration that’s snatching up the foreign executives of online gambling companies at airports, then trying and imprisoning them, despite the fact that online gambling is perfectly legal in the countries where they operate, and where they are citizens.

You can’t help but wonder, what would the U.S. government do if another country tried to claim the power to kidnap U.S. citizens in their homes, then fly them out of the country to be tried on charges that aren’t crimes in the U.S.?

Rather brazen of the governor.

Not only does Gov. Patrick call for two-year jail terms and a $25,000 fine for people caught gambling online, the proposal comes in the same bill whose larger purpose is to allow for three new casinos in Massachusetts.

I’ve seen the same politician push bricks-and-mortar casinos in one bill while restricting online gambling in another. And of course, states like Texas, Illinois, and Virginia have cracked down on private gambling and poker games while spending millions promoting lottery scratch-offs with card-playing and poker themes.

But to shamelessly toss online gamblers in prison while pushing for new casinos in the same bill? Points to Patrick for testicular fortitude, I guess. And for at least being open and transparent about his bald protectionism.

Police in Tennessee broke up a local poker came they say was run by 82-year-old World Series of Poker vet Phil McKinney. McKinney and 15 others were arrested (one on a charge of possessing moonshine). Scary photo of police-seized contraband poker chips here.

Meanwhile, 87-year-old WWII vet Bill Meserve won’t get to play $5 cribbage at the VFW anymore. Police in Gariner, Maine have shut the games down.

The American Legion post in Gardiner was told it could purchase a special license for just $7.50 a year, provided it charged no more than $1 per person and players did not gamble.

"But they want to do it their way," [Police Sgt. William] Gomane said.

Those bastard war veterans, arrogantly assuming that the liberty they risked their lives fighting for includes the right to participate in $5 cribbage games.

Gary Carson writes on my speaking at the Poker Players Alliance event next week:

Balko should ask PPA where they get their money.

I wonder if he knows it’s not from “members”.

PPA isn’t for legal poker, they are for heavily regulated poker with strong barriers to entry for providers of poker games.

Balko actually writes for Reason and calls himself a libertarian. He should be ashamed of himself for supporting those people.

Whoa. I don’t agree with PPA on everything. I’m only speaking at their event. I’ve spoken before a lot of groups that I didn’t entirely agree with.

In fact, I’ve publicly said in the past that I don’t agree with PPA’s efforts to carve out an exemption for poker as a “game of skill” in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act. I believe poker is primarily a game of skill. But I think all Internet gambling should be legalized. Hell, I believe all gambling should be legal.

As for regulation and barriers to entry, well, you fight your battles one at a time. The best bill in Congress right now is the Frank bill, which calls for complete legalization, albeit with a heavy federal regulatory structure. Yeah, that’s a compromise. And even it doesn’t have a chance in hell of becoming law.

I don’t know enough about PPA to respond to Carson’s allegations about funding and motives. They invited me to speak on a panel on Capitol Hill in front of an influential audience, with no strings attached about what I’m allowed to say. I took them up on the offer.

Also, for the record, it is not a paid speech.

I’ll be speaking at a Poker Players Alliance forum on Capitol Hill next week.

PPA asked its members to make YouTube videos to generate some buzz leading up to the event. I thought this one was pretty compelling.

The Illinois Liquor Control Commission is cracking down on bars that host poker tournaments, even if no one is actually gambling.

Up until a few weeks ago, Don Signore spent several nights a week playing Texas Hold ‘Em poker in a league that rotates among south suburban bars and restaurants.

The poker league was a nice social outlet for Signore, 44, helping him get back in circulation after his wife died two years ago. Signore never lost any money during the games. He never even wagered any.

In an effort to stay within the bounds of Illinois’ gambling laws, organizers of the poker league charge no fee to play in their tournaments, ban wagering and offer only nominal prizes to the winners such as gift certificates from the host establishment.

This apparently was too close to the real thing for state authorities, who promptly shut the tournaments down.

Rather than trying to sort out those playing poker for fun from those playing poker for money, they say it makes more sense to simply prohibit poker tournaments in liquor establishments.

"Usually when you’re playing poker, you’re gambling," says Ted Penesis, a spokesman for the liquor commission.

[...]

Dan Kawa, president of 3 of a Kind Poker Inc., says he’s been trying for a couple of years to convince state officials of the legality of his poker tournament operation. But they tell him to save his breath.

If state investigators find an organized poker tournament being conducted in a liquor establishment, they’re going to issue a citation. They’re not going to wait around to sort out the particulars.

[...]

Listen, appearances count," Penesis says. "The appearance is that gambling is occurring, even if it’s not. That’s the problem."

I guess Illinois bars should be prohibited from showing televisted horse racing, or holding darts or billiards tournaments, too. Obligatory link to the Illinois Lottery here.

More than a dozen cops spend 8+ hours busting a poker game in North Carolina.

Not sure I agree Gracz’s argument that it wasn’t a good use of law enforcement resources, though. Hell, they seized a solid $70,000 for the local police department.

So thus far today we have a poker bust and a prostitution bust.

Hmm…

How about a drug bust to complete the consensual crimes trifecta?

Here’s a story about eight cops arresting two people for possessing one joint (with photo goodness).

Just got word that Rep. Ralph Hall is sponsoring a “poker night” fundraiser. For a $500 ($1,000-$2,000 for PACs) entry fee (also known as a campaign contribution), you can come play poker in honor of getting the good congressman reelected. No word on if there are plans to award prizes, which would make the event illegal (game of chance + entry fee + payoff + rake = illegal).

As you might guess, Hall both voted for and co-sponsored the Unlawful Internet Gaming Act, which prohibited online poker.

Frankly, if we’re going to have a Nanny Statist government protecting us from bad choices, I’d consider giving $500 to a congressman quite a bit more wasteful than spending $20 to enter an online poker tournament.

If anyone received a copy of the fax/flyer announcing the Rep. Hall’s poker night, I’d love to get a copy to post here. If so requested, your identity could be kept confidential.

See Senior Corporal Johnny Baker of Dallas SWAT. See Cpl. Baker bust pot-smokers, poker players, and all matter of other people engaging in consensual activity with violent raids, crassly televised on the A&E cable network for all the world to see.

Now see Cpl. Baker get fired from the Dallas SWAT team for having sex with a prostitute.

Take heart in the fact that there is some small bit of justice in the universe.

Cato’s hosting a forum on the Internet gambling trade dispute between the U.S. and Antigua. Looks interesting. It’s a free event if you’re in the area.

Over at reason, you can now read the testimony I gave on police militarization a few weeks ago before the House Crime Subcommittee.

The event wasn’t nearly as entertaining as the Internet gambling hearing (and by “entertaining,” I mean, there weren’t any laughably stupid questions from dim politicians).

One thing that did come up in the Q&A: A woman in the gallery asked for renewed funding for Bill Clinton’s COPs program, which provided federal grants for community policing. I’m a big fan of community policing, which aims to put cops on walking beats, ingrain them in the neighborhoods they’re patrolling, and generally foster a less confrontational, more civil relationship between the police and the people.

The problem is that community policing is really only effectively implemented at the local level. Like lots of other attempts at good policy that come from the federal government, COPs grants often ended up funding endeavors that were a far cry from what advocates intended.

The Madison Times, for example, found in 2000 that COPS grants in many Wisconsin jurisdictions ended up funding–you guessed it–SWAT teams. Which are sort of the opposite of community policing. In fact, when criminologist Peter Kraska interviewed several police chiefs in the Midwest for his large study of paramilitary police units, they told him that a SWAT team was a vital component of any good community policing program.

So the question at the hearing gave me the opportunity to point all of this out. Rep. Bobby Scott, the committee chair, seemed taken aback. He asked me, “Are you telling me that the COPs grants we handed out in the 90s were actually used to start SWAT teams?”

I confirmed that while I didn’t know of any large-scale studies, Kraska’s work and the Madison newspaper’s investigation seemed to confirm that this was indeed the case in at least several communities.

He replied, “Well that’s certainly not what we had in mind.” And the room filled with laughter.

It was kinda’ cool to be be in a position to give an influential congressmen a lesson in unintended consequences.

I just received the transcript to my testimony before Congress earlier this month on Internet gambling.

I thought you might enjoy one of the odder exchanges I had at the hearing. The exchange was with Rep. Spence Bachus, and I guess this was supposed to be his "gotcha" question for me. To be honest, I was so floored by the sheer ignorance of the question, I didn't quite know how to respond. To set up the exchange, one of the points of contention during the hearing was the reliability of age verification systems. Enjoy.

Mr. Bachus: Mr. Balko, in your testimony, you sort of—you talked about one of the brands you singled out for praise was FullTilt Poker?

Mr. Balko: Well, that was one of the—it's one of the more reputable poker…

Mr. Bachus: One of the more reputable firms. Have you looked at their website?

Mr. Balko: Yes, I have.

Mr. Bachus: Did you read—you now, they have the biographies of some of the players, and you've seen those haven't you?

Mr. Balko: I'm familiar with several of the biographies of the top poker players, yes.

Mr. Bachus: Are you familiar with Ross Boatman's biography on their website?

Mr. Balko: No, I'm not.

Mr. Bachus: Let me tell you about him. [Reading from bio.] Ross was 10 years old when he played poker for the first time. His brother Barney, who is a little older than Ross, was playing with some friends, and after much pleading, they let him sit in.

His gambling career really didn't get started until a couple of years later, though, when he was 12 years old. Ross was too young and didn't have the money to play with those guys—I guess they're talking about his 14-year-old brother—but they let him sit and watch, and he learned plenty.

[Bachus, now looking at me.] I guess the verification system didn't work.

Mr. Balko [flummoxed]: I believe that all took place well before the age of Internet gambling, Congressman.

Mr. Bachus: Okay. Was it? I wonder why it's still on the site today.

This really is astonishingly dumb. Either Bachus is posturing and intentionally misleading people who don't know the difference between a guy who played poker with his brother 30 years ago and a website that lets kids gamble online (which in itself is dishonest) or he himself doesn't know the difference. Which is even scarier.

New York City:

Cops in New York City are accused of wrongly breaking into a local man's home this month, holding him at gunpoint, then stealing $2,000 from a jacket.

The May 9 incident was a result of a raid in which the police officers were given faulty information, the New York Daily News reported Sunday.

"They didn't tell me what they were looking for or why they were here," said Alisaleh Moshad Ali, 50, the Yemeni immigrant whose house was broken into. "They just told me to get on the floor."

The police later apologized, after finding that they were at the wrong address. However, Ali and his wife, Leslie, 30, have not received any explanation for the $2,000 Ali says went missing from his jacket, which was in a closet.

Police argue Ali left the house for 30 minutes after the incident, leaving someone else the opportunity to steal the money since the door was reportedly broken.

The Daily News reported the police department has been receiving an increased number of complaints involving raids on the wrong homes.

As this Metafilter post points out, that's six botched raids in the last five weeks. That we know of.

Last September, civil rights attorney Joel Berger and I wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal about how New York City officials have reneged on their promises to reform the way drug raids are executed after the 2003 wrong-door raid that resulted in the death of 57-year-old Alberta Spruill. Looks like they've not only not learned much, but the problem is getting worse. There are some pretty striking similarities between Spruill's death and that of Kathryn Johnston. I hope Atlanta learns better than New York. I have my doubts.

Meanwhile, the family of Sal Culosi tells me that the Justice Department has found no criminal civil rights violations in the SWAT shooting of the 37-year old Virginia optometrist, who was under investigation for gambling on football with friends. While I understand the finding, it's still frustrating when combined with the fact that no state criminal charges will be filed, either. If a non-police citizen of Virginia pointed a loaded weapon at a fellow citizen which resulted in an accidental discharge and death, he'd almost certainly face charges, at least of some sort of criminal negligence. This police officer got a short suspension, and will keep his job.

The Culosi family is moving forward with a civil suit.

This weekend, I’ll post the testimony I’m going to give on Capitol Hill tomorrow.

But here’s a link here where you can watch the Internet gambling hearings where I’ll be speaking. Kicks off tomorrow at 10 am ET.

My co-panelists include poker deity Howard Lederer, an executive from a web payment processing service, and, arguing contra, a pastor whose son robbed a bank to fund his online poker habit.

I’m told that Rep. Ron Paul will be introducing me, which is pretty cool.

I’ll be back in D.C. on Thursday, and should resume regular blogging then. A few self-promotional items coming up:

The National Taxpayers Union and Downsize D.C. have both joined the move to repeal the Internet gambling ban.

This is great news. More, please.