The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the UIGEA, had, the bottom line is, prohibited banks and payment processors from processing transactions that will correlate to online gambling. It has not just complicated loading accounts, but additionally withdrawing. While USA online casinos have continued to work, they've had to utilize payment processors that will circumvent these restrictions. Sadly, the UIGEA wasn't even set to go into effect until December of 2009, thought the implications of the legislation had drop out that could be nothing short of catastrophic for several online gambling companies, especially those who relied heavily on the United States market.

The UIGEA had hamstrung lots of the operations around the globe that utilized the American market to be able to stay ahead in profits, whilst keeping losses to a low. The implications ran deep, damaging many companies operating these casinos. Not merely had some of the larger, publicly traded online casinos taken a significant hit to the purchase price per share, which in turn hurt the shareholders of the companies, but additionally cost the businesses profits from the United States Market. PartyGaming comes in your thoughts specifically, though other large gambling firms had taken a hit. Additionally, many executives in charge 카지노커뮤니티 카지노검증 온카 of several of the online casinos, including Anurag Dikshit, one of many early founders of PartyGaming, have been indicted and fined because of their involvement in online gambling - despite the fact these companies have been based outside of the United States. Payment processors had also been significantly impacted, as many of these financial companies had taken a blow from federal persecution, which, in some cases, amounted to countless countless dollars in seizures. Sadly, the UIGEA had not even been invoked in many of these seizures. Rather, the Wire Act of 1961, a law that were passed years before the Internet was even beginning to develop into what we see today.

Regardless of the laws that had begun to inhibit online casino gambling, many online casinos continued to just accept USA players. While several of the bigger brands of online casino have been stripped from the United States market, numerous others had remained steadfast inside their dedication to delivering casino gaming to the American market. Though there are online casinos still operating in the USA, the choice has become limited. To be able to concentrate on a limited market, online casinos accepting American players had to offer a service of higher quality. That having been said, those online casinos have had to outclass the older kinds of casino software that had removed themselves from the American market.

There are three major brands of casino software which have yet to cease operating within the United States. These brands have no intention on leaving the American market, and still out perform those who have left USA players high and dry. Real Time Gaming, or RTG, Rival Gaming, or just Rival, and Odds On, also called Vegas Technology, are the three kinds of casino software still accepting Americans. Each carries its own unique features, though they universally out perform those individuals who have left the United states behind, including Microgaming, Playtech, and others. While some of the individual casinos operating under these brands have do not quite happy with the contention of the United States government, nearly all of them continue to provide USA players with high quality casino gaming.

Casinos powered by RTG are one of many superior three. Real Time gaming has brought high quality gaming to players through the entire United States. Their superiority comes through the digital eloquence of the games. Rather than delivering tired, bland tables games and slots, they've taken steps to ensure each player will relish the smooth graphics and action of the casino. Real Time Gaming casinos supply their players with enough diversity to keep entertaining, as well as huge bonuses because of their players. Casinos outside of the United States, particularly Microgaming casinos, will more often than not flunk when it comes to bonuses. Through integrated security, these casinos beneath the RTG brand also remain the absolute most secure.

The 2nd brand of casino gaming comes through Rival Gaming. Rival Gaming has generated and subsequently distributed a unique number of games. These games, the Interactive Slots, have brought a complete new amount of entertainment to slot games. As opposed to the standard spinning of the reels, Rival has raised the bar to the pinnacle of casino gaming. Their table games have also been a big success, bringing in players who seek simply to play cards, dice, and other table based casino games. Though players outside of the United States may take pleasure in the Interactive Slot, there is no international online casino that blocks American IP addresses that offers anything remotely similar to the power and selection of the I-Slot.

Finally we come to Odds On. With Odds On Casinos, players are entitled to utilize one of many original kinds of online casino software. Odds On has revolutionized the way in which games are played, particularly slots. The Odds On bonus slots have brought countless thousands of dollars to their winners. Additionally, these bonus slots are backed by the large, multiplayer slot tournaments which have become a selection for several gamers across the world. The size and popularity of those tournaments are almost exclusive to Odds On. Slot tournaments provide players with the ability to enjoy slot gaming without an overwhelming financial risk, while providing easier usage of large winnings. Though other kinds of casino software will periodically provide players with the chance to enjoy slot tournaments, none is going to be as versatile or commonplace as those found through Odds On - proving once more online casinos accepting USA players are superior to those found open and then European players.

Why would anyone sell?

Bitcoin now costs the same as it did the day after Thanksgiving.
Ethereum costs the same as it did on Jan 2.
Neo is currently twice as much as it was Dec 21.
Monero is at 233 and it never broke 200 until this past December.
Cardano is now right where it was in mid December.

It's too bad people are glued to their hourly account balance and missing out on the big picture. Emotionally distraught people are selling. Financially wise people are buying. This summer, there is going to be alot of bitter folks that wish they never logged into their accounts on Feb 1 2018. Countries around the world are not banning crypto. They are simply cleaning things up and gearing up for full blown legal crypto. Sure, there will be new rules but crypto is here to stay. If tomorrow marked the final day of cryptocurrency history, I could understand the panic and the selling. However, do you think the Canadian gov't would be using Ethereum for record keeping if crypto was in trouble? Would IBM be partnering with Stellar if crypto was doomed? Would Microsoft be sponsoring NEO dev competitions if crypto was ending? Would Samsung be pouring big money into building and selling cryptocurrency mining chips if Crypto was truly in trouble? Politicians are pumping the breaks until they figure out how to cash in. They did they same thing with daily fantasy sports, online poker, gambling, and cannabis. In 2015, Daily Fantasy Sports was legal in 45 states. In 2016, it was legal in only 10 states because politicians wanted to shut it down until they figured out how to make money off it for themselves. Today, DFS is legal in 41 states. That's right, from an unregulated 45 (2015), cracked down to 10 (2016), and now that politicians can make money off the regulated industry, it's legal in 41. Folks, crypto is going through the growing pains of becoming a full blown accepted industry. Check out online poker...

1995: The first online poker websites appear. Everyone made money except governments.
1999: Republican from Virginia, Robert Goodlatte, tried to shut it down with a new law. People panicked and cashed out. His law never passed. It was defeated.
2003: Thanks to pressure from the Justice Department, most banks blocked customers from sending money to poker sites
2005: The world's largest online poker site (PartyGaming) went live on the London Stock exchange the same year that a Republican from Iowa tried to ban credit card payments on gambling sites. His bill never reached the Senate floor.
2006: Goodlatte is back again. Tries to ban online pokegambling. He is defeated again.
2006: President Bush signs the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, banning the transfer of money to gambling sites. Everyone cashes out.
Today: New Jersey, Nevada, and Delaware have legalized it. People in every state freely use offshore sites. Banks are no longer blocking payments.

Whether it's online poker, cannabis, daily fantasy sports, or cryptocurrency, the people vote with their wallets. Sure, governments always get involved so they can make a buck too (if it was about our safety, health, and well being then guns would be outlawed). Hold your coins if you haven't sold. Buy coins this weekend at a massive discount. Embrace the future. Expect dips along the way. We are riding a climate change graph that continually trends up. So what if there is a record cold winter here or there. The zig-zagging line is trending up from year to year. Hold and/or buy. You will have major profits should you choose to sell this summer, fall, or in 2019. Keep your eye on the prize, stay off reddit, stay away from "news", and trust your instincts when you realized months or years ago that this was an unstoppable revolution: the future.

It is significant to learn where online gambling is in today's highly commercialized world. This is not an easy discussion and will require us to expend time and effort if we were to seek enlightenment on this matter. But this knowledge is relevant for beginners, players, and casinos themselves. For instance, such information can give you a perception of gambling, not only in the country but in the entire world. Statistics can give you information regarding the kind of gamblers casinos have and the overall gambling behavior of the populace. If you are an interested online gambler, you should keep yourself updated to the latest news.
Looking at the General Picture of the Online Gambling Realm
At the present, gamblers around the world are flustered at the approval of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which prohibits Americans from gambling games online and which seems the most pressing issue concerning the gambling public. Nonetheless, the bill targets only the American citizens and the US gambling and casino market. bola tangkas online But the implications of this law spread globally. One of the notable effects is the higher stringency in money transferring procedure and banking options in gambling sites. This started in 2007 though in a vague, confusing manner. The outcome is the closure of online gambling sites as a result of reduction of stocks brought about by diminishing market as the US bans its people to join online gambling. Gambling sites outside United States also forbids registration of US players. Indeed, the effects of UIGEA travelled beyond the bounds of America, affecting worldwide gambling industry, impairing more casino sites than it ought to be.
Gambling on the Internet
So, you may want to check out how gambling is prospering in other nations which have continued the tradition of gambling. American gamblers are not entirely banned from joining the gambling sites and that should be clear. Some states still allow people to gamble despite the presence of UIGEA, which is not fully implemented across the nation. More countries around the globe are promoting casinos to compensate the dire slump in the US casino market. These countries include Barbuda and Antigua in the Caribbean area, where online gambling has been long successful and flourishing. The Caribbean has some of the best licensed online casinos whose boom has been due to low taxes and speedy transactions. Of course, apart from this Caribbean country, there are more countries that allow online gambling and online casinos to operate, such as France, Australia, South Korea, and Germany. These countries have long seen the economic advantage of supporting this kind of market.
Future of Gambling
The stability of both land based and online casinos is a subject of continuing debate. There is much discussion regarding the real economic benefits of promoting casinos and letting them thrive in the commercial scene. There is also an argument regarding the pros and cons of having them around and whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages or is it the other way around. Nonetheless, experts believe that online gambling and roulette are sure to be around for a while and that this industry remains prosperous no matter what.

With the growing trend of major centralised crypto exchanges dramatically changing their terms of service to exclude customers from the US (amongst others), there is still a belief among the community that the same forces will combine together on decentralised exchanges (DEX).
There are several reasons why this isn’t going to happen on the scale that is needed, and only compliant centralised crypto exchanges will emerge victorious.
Also, this is not the first-time offshore companies and P2P platforms have tangled with regulators, so I want to recap on a few of the correlations between past lawsuits and the current situation with crypto exchanges.

Online Poker

In 2006 the US passed the SAFE Port Act which contained the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA), ultimately this prohibited the online gaming sites performing any transactions with American Financial Institutions. While many of the operators closed its doors completely to US customers, a few operators including the two then largest (PokerStars & Full Tilt) continued in defiance waiting for the bill . As with exchanges, poker sites rely heavily on centralised traffic to get the volume that the leaders are famous for. PokerStars, operating from the Isle of Man, had assured users that it could continue operating under the advice of their lawyers. Poker, at this time was debatable whether it was in the scope of the legislation of the bill, although the DOJ openly disagreed. By 2010 the Justice Department had spent years hunting down and prosecuting those involved in processing U.S. payments for PokerStars and other offshore websites. Then in early 2011, known as BLACK FRIDAY, the justice department intervened decisively, freezing funds around the world. This included 75 bank accounts associated with the gambling firms, including Swiss accounts linked to PokerStars companies. A little more than a year after Black Friday, PokerStars paid $547 million to settle the Justice Department’s civil claims , without admitting wrongdoing or liability. As part of the deal, it promised to never again take U.S. poker players’ money and to ensure that then owner, and still a fugitive, Isai Scheinberg – was no longer directly involved in running the business.
What does this have to do with exchanges you ask?
Should an exchange be seen to be operating outside of a countries law, they may be offshore and not directly answerable to that country, but if they are deemed to be turning a blind eye to money laundering, bank fraud, violating security laws etc. then the funds are NOT safu. Even without the seizures, compliant operators could be forced not to deal with funds originating from non-compliant exchanges, DEX, mixers etc. so your FIAT ramps in your jurisdiction would be effectively nullified. Given that the world currently (and for the foreseeable future) operates primarily in FIAT. The possibility of this alone would severely limit the majority interest in using these services, and resulting in little volume.

P2P File Sharing vs DEXs

As with using a DEX, P2P file sharing attempts to circumnavigate laws and regulations by leaving the transaction in the hands of the users. In many places this system falls over because as with most DEX, P2P file sharing platforms largely rely on a central site/operator to maintain the network/database such as KickAss Torrents and Napster. These operators can be prosecuted on the basis that if they are deemed capable of supervising/controlling any infringements or whether they stand to benefit financially. Napster in this case was deemed to be financially benefiting purely on the basis that they were gaining users and it could be used to serve future business models. This ruling throws questions over the culpability of operators such as IDEX and BINANCE DEX as they have more of a direct financial interest in their operations by giving listings and taking fees like a regular exchange does. The SEC has already landed charges on the ETHERDELTA founder for operating an unregistered exchange in November 2018, albeit a DEX.
Yes, there are true P2P file sharing operators and true DEXs and they both suffer from similar issues. Primarily - speed, a true DEX cannot deliver the speed required for high volume assets and high frequency trading. Secondly, as a user of a P2P system you are not absolved of the laws regarding your transactions, you can still be prosecuted even if the operator can’t. The possibility of these two points alone will also severely limit the majority interest in using these services, and yet again less volume.
Using a DEX is also not a solution for the mainstream, while P2P file sharing was very widespread and common, people were happy to take the risk for a free mp3 or movie, it mainly served a different client base to the investor community. Any serious investor (retail or institutional) coming into the crypto space will not be willing to risk a portion of their portfolio on non-complaint exchanges as regulations continue to tighten.

The Resistance

There will be many that disagree with compliance, mainly those that have been in the space the longest. Like the internet, its no longer the playground it was back in the early 90s as user numbers started dramatically increasing, yet here we are using the same basic tools discussing a new one. This doesn't mean the end of DEXs and underground trading. I do however think that these will not be the places where the next major IEOs are taking place and where the high volume assets will be traded. For the crypto space to continue to push through to the mainstream and get new money coming into the space so BTC could reach new highs, changes are going to happen. The ideology of the past will have to adapt, and lets not forget how tainted it is with scams, as with the early days of the internet. Trusted central hubs have been formed over the years, although they are not all without fault, they serve a purpose and have also had to adapt.

The Future

The next generation of exchanges will undoubtedly be taking the market share of future trading alongside with crypto-fiat services. Coinbase are one of the few major exchanges that are looking safe in the current climate of compliance. New competition will drive down the fees as well so Coinbase will have to adapt to maintain its share in the US/Europe, as with in Europe, the launch of Eterbase with integrated IBAN banking will surely shake up the industry.
Exchanges that are currently side stepping compliance such as Binance, Gate.io, Huobi, and Kraken (although on May 15, 2018, Powell said that Kraken "would probably get registered as a broker dealer and then an ATS" with the SEC), will soon find themselves under more international pressure and possibly prosecution if they operate without due diligence in regulated markets.
Trade Safu.

Why would anyone sell? Bitcoin now costs the same as it did the day after Thanksgiving. Ethereum costs the same as it did on Jan 2. Neo is currently twice as much as it was Dec 21. Monero is at 233 and it never broke 200 until this past December. Cardano is now right where it was in mid December. It's too bad people are glued to their hourly account balance and missing out on the big picture. Emotionally distraught people are selling. Financially wise people are buying. This summer, there is going to be alot of bitter folks that wish they never logged into their accounts on Feb 1 2018. Countries around the world are not banning crypto. They are simply cleaning things up and gearing up for full blown legal crypto. Sure, there will be new rules but crypto is here to stay. If tomorrow marked the final day of cryptocurrency history, I could understand the panic and the selling. However, do you think the Canadian gov't would be using Ethereum for record keeping if crypto was in trouble? Would IBM be partnering with Stellar if crypto was doomed? Would Microsoft be sponsoring NEO dev competitions if crypto was ending? Would Samsung be pouring big money into building and selling cryptocurrency mining chips if Crypto was truly in trouble? Politicians are pumping the breaks until they figure out how to cash in. They did they same thing with daily fantasy sports, online poker, gambling, and cannabis. In 2015, Daily Fantasy Sports was legal in 45 states. In 2016, it was legal in only 10 states because politicians wanted to shut it down until they figured out how to make money off it for themselves. Today, DFS is legal in 41 states. That's right, from an unregulated 45 (2015), cracked down to 10 (2016), and now that politicians can make money off the regulated industry, it's legal in 41. Folks, crypto is going through the growing pains of becoming a full blown accepted industry. Check out online poker...

1995: The first online poker websites appear. Everyone made money except governments.
1999: Republican from Virginia, Robert Goodlatte, tried to shut it down with a new law. People panicked and cashed out. His law never passed. It was defeated.
2003: Thanks to pressure from the Justice Department, most banks blocked customers from sending money to poker sites
2005: The world's largest online poker site (PartyGaming) went live on the London Stock exchange the same year that a Republican from Iowa tried to ban credit card payments on gambling sites. His bill never reached the Senate floor.
2006: Goodlatte is back again. Tries to ban online pokegambling. He is defeated again.
2006: President Bush signs the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, banning the transfer of money to gambling sites. Everyone cashes out.

Today: New Jersey, Nevada, and Delaware have legalized it. People in every state freely use offshore sites. Banks are no longer blocking payments.
Whether it's online poker, cannabis, daily fantasy sports, or cryptocurrency, the people vote with their wallets. Sure, governments always get involved so they can make a buck too (if it was about our safety, health, and well being then guns would be outlawed). Hold your coins if you haven't sold. Buy coins this weekend at a massive discount. Embrace the future. Expect dips along the way. We are riding a climate change graph that continually trends up. So what if there is a record cold winter here or there. The zig-zagging line is trending up from year to year. Hold and/or buy. You will have major profits should you choose to sell this summer, fall, or in 2019. Keep your eye on the prize, stay off reddit, stay away from "news", and trust your instincts when you realized months or years ago that this was an unstoppable revolution: the future.

Why would anyone sell? Bitcoin now costs the same as it did the day after Thanksgiving. Ethereum costs the same as it did on Jan 2. Neo is currently twice as much as it was Dec 21. Monero is at 233 and it never broke 200 until this past December. Cardano is now right where it was in mid December. It's too bad people are glued to their hourly account balance and missing out on the big picture. Emotionally distraught people are selling. Financially wise people are buying. This summer, there is going to be alot of bitter folks that wish they never logged into their accounts on Feb 1 2018. Countries around the world are not banning crypto. They are simply cleaning things up and gearing up for full blown legal crypto. Sure, there will be new rules but crypto is here to stay. If tomorrow marked the final day of cryptocurrency history, I could understand the panic and the selling. However, do you think the Canadian gov't would be using Ethereum for record keeping if crypto was in trouble? Would IBM be partnering with Stellar if crypto was doomed? Would Microsoft be sponsoring NEO dev competitions if crypto was ending? Would Samsung be pouring big money into building and selling cryptocurrency mining chips if Crypto was truly in trouble? Politicians are pumping the breaks until they figure out how to cash in. They did they same thing with daily fantasy sports, online poker, gambling, and cannabis. In 2015, Daily Fantasy Sports was legal in 45 states. In 2016, it was legal in only 10 states because politicians wanted to shut it down until they figured out how to make money off it for themselves. Today, DFS is legal in 41 states. That's right, from an unregulated 45 (2015), cracked down to 10 (2016), and now that politicians can make money off the regulated industry, it's legal in 41. Folks, crypto is going through the growing pains of becoming a full blown accepted industry. Check out online poker...

1995: The first online poker websites appear. Everyone made money except governments.
1999: Republican from Virginia, Robert Goodlatte, tried to shut it down with a new law. People panicked and cashed out. His law never passed. It was defeated.
2003: Thanks to pressure from the Justice Department, most banks blocked customers from sending money to poker sites
2005: The world's largest online poker site (PartyGaming) went live on the London Stock exchange the same year that a Republican from Iowa tried to ban credit card payments on gambling sites. His bill never reached the Senate floor.
2006: Goodlatte is back again. Tries to ban online pokegambling. He is defeated again.
2006: President Bush signs the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, banning the transfer of money to gambling sites. Everyone cashes out.
Today: New Jersey, Nevada, and Delaware have legalized it. People in every state freely use offshore sites. Banks are no longer blocking payments.

Whether it's online poker, cannabis, daily fantasy sports, or cryptocurrency, the people vote with their wallets. Sure, governments always get involved so they can make a buck too (if it was about our safety, health, and well being then guns would be outlawed). Hold your coins if you haven't sold. Buy coins this weekend at a massive discount. Embrace the future. Expect dips along the way. We are riding a climate change graph that continually trends up. So what if there is a record cold winter here or there. The zig-zagging line is trending up from year to year. Hold and/or buy. You will have major profits should you choose to sell this summer, fall, or in 2019. Keep your eye on the prize, stay off reddit, stay away from "news", and trust your instincts when you realized months or years ago that this was an unstoppable revolution: the future.

Numerous conventional gambling businesses assembled on the sidelines as the Internet nurtured and faltered to get benefit of the fresh equipment for their industries. It wasn't awaiting 1996 that a corporation named Inter Casino switched on the earliest online game. After the primary online gambling site had released, many corporations started hurrying to link in on the deed.
One of the basis casino games online
Turned into attractiveness is that competitor can participate from everywhere? You don't require travelling to a casino game location in command to participate casino games. The increasing fame of poker as well added to the status of online gaming sites, since it was very simple for individuals to play at these casino games online and they developed rapidly. Individuals adore gambling and casino games online authorized them a simple means to perform it. Casino games online will give so much pleasure that it will be almost impossible to leave it. Not just that casino games online is one of the most clearable games in the world.
Hundreds of first-class online game to decide from nowadays and to discover the precise site for you might appear like an unbelievable mission. However, lessening down the characteristics you are searching for will assist you locate the ideal casino games online fit for your desire. Ahead of searching for justifications, it is as well significant to identify which sites are legitimate and lawful and which sites are not. It is hard to declare accurately what creates an exceptional online game since diverse individuals have diverse main concerns in views to what an online game casino must present.
Casino online lead is separated into diverse segments to formulate it simpler for you to hastily and simply locate the sites that you really fascinated. Whether you are a gambling novice or a casino expert, it is certain that you'll discover this casino channel a priceless source. There are online sites as well that has casino gaming volume that contains casino tickets to keep you cash when you visit them.
Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act
At the time that Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act turned into an authenticity in year 2006, it developed into significantly more rigid for USA casinos online to admit performers. However, it is a delusion that online gaming casinos have turn into prohibited in USA. If you are not from USA you can also play in USA casinos. It will be a dream come true if you can play in USA casinos.
USA casinos are the residence of site gamers and there are quite a few casinos online where you are able to locate some high category casinos where US players are authorized to participate. The precise lawful condition regarding to USA casinos online differs from every state but despite of your dwelling state whichever rule touching casino online games used to influence the casinos and economic establishments and not the participants themselves.
you wanna win visit our online casino website : 카지노사이트

I originally posted this on the LGoH forums and of course it was taken down in less than 10 minutes as "unapproved." I got feedback from a couple of players who liked the post and found it interesting, one of them encouraged me to post it here for more visibility to the community at large. I apologize in advance for the post as it's 1) long (I tend to be verbose when my brain latches on to an idea) and 2) delves into topics that have less to do with the game mechanics itself and more to do with social engineering. I get that we all play games to escape/enjoy ourselves, but I feel that it's important to ask questions from time to time. And this game has made me question how/why I play games more than any I've other played. Without further ado, here was my banned post and I strongly suggest to click the links and read those as well to provide background and context.
Hey guys, I just had a thought that occurred to me while I was browsing the outrage pr0n the forums have become due to the latest incident in a string of head-scratching business decisions from the company that runs this game.
What if this entire game is a really elaborate social experiment on us gamers as a sample population? I know it sounds really tin-foil-hatted, and there's a really good chance this post gets deleted awfully quick, but stick with me here and hear me out.
The behavior exhibited by the company appears to be some of the most egregious lack of empathy towards a player base that I can remember. And then I got to thinking about it. Did y'all forget about Battlefield 2 and EA's loot box 'situation?' Are any of you aware how much of a mess Battle for Azeroth has been for Blizzard so far? I play WoW, but I've been on-again, off-again for a few years and I'm not really devoted to it any more, mostly a filthy casual. But this whole ordeal with the past commander event has really got me thinking about it.
https://gameanalytics.com/blog/how-to-determine-your-games-player-ltv.html
Here's an article talking about LTV - or Lifetime Value - as an analytic tool to determine how successful a game is/will be. It basically boils a game down to nothing more than statistics. It strips away the veneer that the game is actually something to be enjoyed and portrays it more as "how do I calculate what that enjoyment is worth in terms of ROI - or Return on Investment." Read through the article, it's actually really good. It will go a long ways in explaining the trend of behavior seen in so many developers in the gaming industry as a whole lately, but especially our little experiment here. The key section here to look at is this one:
"As you know, APRU – or ARPDAU – is a game’s daily revenue divided by the number of active users. To use this method to calculate LTV, start by defining what an inactive player is using retention values; chances are you can set this value to a week, ten day, or two week period depending on your game’s historical performance and the complexity of your game. Then take a look at the number of users who expire on a given day, and average that with the number of days from a player’s first visit to the current date (or whatever date you’re considering the end point for the purpose of this exercise). This is your player lifetime value."
APRU is average revenue per user and ARPDAU is essentially the same thing, but down to the micro "daily user" level as it provides more accurate financial granularity. The most important phrase here to focus on is "number of users who expire on a given day." That is a very powerful phrase because it makes the assumption that there WILL be expiration of player accounts on a daily basis. On the surface that seems like a "duh" statement here, but dig a little deeper. In the business model of determining how profitable a given game will be is a measurement based in no small part on the expectation that players will quit. Stop and think about that for a moment. Now apply it to the behavior exhibited by the game company right now.
https://venturebeat.com/2016/05/09/n3tworks-neil-young-takes-a-second-stab-at-mobile-gaming-greatness/
Here is an interview that the company's CEO had with a tech news website back in 2016. During the interview he mentions LTV and 'human behavior,' the latter of which crops up often in discussion about gaming habits. He spends more time talking about behavior and financials than the actual substance of the games themselves. I mean he's running a business after all. If the business isn't profitable, then why make the game in the first place?
Now here's where it gets a little weird. https://www.gamblingsites.com/online-gambling-jurisdictions/us/ Specifically look at the section titled "The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA)." Mentioned in this section is that the legislation contains a whole host of loopholes that have been used by online gambling sites for quite some time, the most notable being "games of skill." If any of y'all pay attention to the news and/or the US professional football league NFL, you'll remember this: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/07/upshot/the-big-winners-in-fantasy-football-and-the-rest-of-us.html from a few years ago. Basically both companies got taken to court over just how much "skill" was actually involved in the game and whether it constituted actual gambling or not. Reports surfaced of insider information, company employees playing matches on the competitor's website, and some industrious programmers creating all manner of scripts to target unsuspecting new players.
Now clearly this company isn't a sports betting company. That being said, look at the structure of the gem system. Almost everything of value in the game is dependent on gem expenditures. The number of gems earn-able in play without purchase is incredibly small. The cost to buy packs each event can constitute either a significant monetary investment or and even more significant time investment, often with little discreet value to the player per pack purchased. Much more emphasis is put on quantity over quality in terms of all aspects of play. The more you put in the more you are likely to get out, but often those rewards do not line up with effort expended, especially in the F2P track. This is all intentional. If you don't think that, I've got a bridge to sell you haha. However a large portion of the reason there is little ROI for the PLAYERS is due almost entirely to the randomness of the rewards for effort put in. Yes there are rewards that are given out for sheer grind, but the highest rewards come from either an insane amount of time spent playing the game, or a truly astonishing amount of money being put out to skip the effort. This is not even touching on the leaderboards, nor the frequency of events in game which churn out new cards/abilities weekly. But how often have you opened a pack that had "Hero (insert event type or affinity here) 3+" and gotten nothing but outdated 3-star garbage heroes that often aren't even the right event type or affinity? Odds are that unless a reward is specified, the response to that is a resounding "all the damn time!"
Now there was another post on this forum by another player that linked some publicly published articles from company employees who may or may not actually work on this game. Whether they do or not is actually immaterial, it's the philosophy behind the articles that is important. One of them talks openly about the LTV and the other talks about the user experience interacting with random rewards, specifically surrounding the concept of opening up some kind of container be it a pack or an object that contains the reward. They specifically mention the animation choices for opening the random reward container and include an image that looks very much like a slot machine pull arm. Now obviously they aren't mentioning slot machines explicitly, nor is one shown in the article, however check out this article on the neuroscience of slot machines - https://sciencelife.uchospitals.edu/2009/11/09/slot-machines-neuroscience-in-action/ . Notice anything eerily similar between how they talk about the "feel" and experience of opening a pack of cards vs the stimulation of a pull on a slot machine? Doesn't take too much to notice, I'm sure. Again, nothing I'm saying here should come as a surprise to anyone who's made it this far in my wall 'o text.
Here's my theory given the above information. A tl;dr for those of you with not enough attention span hah. This game we play was designed to come as close to monetizing every single portion of the game as possible. The insane amounts of grind are put in place to incentivize purchasing gems as the only real way to accomplish your goals, be they competitive placements or completion of collections. This is the main reason why gem prices are as high as they are and structured so that the "best value" is always the highest priced bundle. They even incentivize it further by including gem bundles that have gem gifts to make you feel like more of a team player by helping out and giving gems to your guild mates. The more you buy, the more you help. On top of this the rewards are advertised as "you could possibly get the best cards at the highest level on this one pack" in the same way slot machines say "the next pull could be a jackpot." Except in both cases, the payout is variable and even when you get a payout, it's often far less than you've already spent. Compounding this is that the communication between the company and the players is almost non-existent and very rarely addresses issues of substance like this. Look how long it took them to add in a way to send gifts without having to tap for each gift. I'm not a programmer, so I don't know how long those things take to code, but given the length of time the request has been in, it shouldn't take as long as it did. As the icing on the cake, whenever there IS player backlash such as in the PACT boycott thing, the response is to calculate the bare minimum response for the shortest amount of time and get back to business as usual. This game is trying to come as close to the marriage of slot machine and rpg as possible and see how long it can last. That's why they don't care if we quit or stop playing. That outcome was already decided before the game launched and factored into the LTV and ROI equations. They're probably planning on the game failing so they can compare notes on this game as compared to others and the NEXT game they put out will be slightly less predatory, but will make FAR more money as a result because they'll find that sweet spot between giving you the high you're looking for and making sure you keep coming back for another hit.
I have seen people talk about other phone app games as an alternative to this one as if that's not something they're watching for as part of their market research. And we're all acting like the gaming industry as a whole console, PC, and phones haven't been doing this for years now. DLC? Finished game product that was likely available at launch that they wanted to withhold so they could extend that LTV. Blizzard has come under some pretty intense fire since restructuring their content release schedule as a cynical way to keep subs on life support a little longer and squeeze out a little more value before losing you. We don't really need to get into the EA fiasco (which I DO incidentally find it funny that the CEO of this game's company was a former EA employee, albeit not tied to their more recent gaffs). Us gamers as a demographic display some rather unhealthy behavioral tendencies and the gaming industry as a whole has just continued to adapt to try and find the best way to get us to keep paying money while reducing their cost to get that money. Just seems that this company in particular is trying to push the boundaries of that envelope and see just how far we as a community can get pushed before we break and revolt. So cheers to us for being excellent lab specimens!
While I am relatively bitter and cynical about this entire thing, as an anthropologist, I can't help but find it fascinating. I imagine if I had used the powers I learned in college for evil, who knows, I might have been on the other side of the screen reading all this data from us and making copious demographic analytics based on the reactions and which accounts they are linked to and studying the trend of who accounts for the most outspoken and what economic class they fit into both within and outside of the game. I'm sure the data is both impressive and deeply interesting. Anyway, apologies for just how massive this post is, and if it comes across as a little out-there. Just food for thought. Stay classy folks

Lawful minds counted on Web wagering regulations as a specialized when the market surpassed development as well as took off right into the general public mind. "The regulation bordering Net gaming in the USA has actually been dirty, to claim the least,"
On the other hand, Net wagering legislations in the U.K. have actually made the lives of slot sites like slot deposit pulsa as well as gamers a little bit less complicated. The flow of the Gaming Act of 2005 has actually essentially legislated and also managed online play in the U.K.
With the purposes of maintaining betting from advertising "criminal activity or condition" the U.K. act efforts to maintain betting reasonable, along with safeguarding more youthful people as well as others that might be taken advantage of by wagering procedure. Unlike the USA, which still holds on to the 1961 Cable Wager Act, the U.K. dramatically unwinded laws that are years old. A gaming compensation was developed to apply the code and also permit drivers.
An Entire Various Other Nation
According to Walters and also several various other onlookers of the Web gaming regulations scene, the USA Division of Justice remains to watch all gambling on the Web as prohibited under the Wire Act. Yet there are information in the government regulation that resist efforts to toss a covering over all on-line betting.
The Cable Wager Act develops the basis for government activity on Web gaming legislations in the USA. The legislation was implied to enhance as well as assistance regulations in the different states, concentrating largely on "being taken part in business of wagering or betting" utilizing cable interaction to put wagers or wagers on showing off occasions or comparable competitions. The legislation likewise talks about getting cash or credit score that arises from such a wager. The secrets are "company," "cash or credit rating" and also "cable interaction center."
However as numerous lawyers and also supporters of reasonable Web gaming regulations stress, the government legislation does not particularly resolve various other types of gaming. This has actually left the regulation open up to analysis when it pertains to on the internet gambling establishments especially and also utilizing the Internet to play on-line video games.
October 13, 2006 is a critical day in the debate bordering the legalisation of gaming. For any individual desiring to comprehend Web betting legislations, the government regulation handed down that day is necessary understanding. Head Of State George W. Shrub authorized the Unlawful Web Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which is planned to restrict some "economic deals" utilized for on the internet betting.
However even if present government gaming legislations can plainly specify something as basic as a lawful gaming age, the more recent UIGEA has actually not cleared up all the dirt increased around the problem of on-line betting. Lawyers such as Walters (as well as several others) have actually mentioned that the UIGEA appears to refer just to monetary deals as well as wagers that are unlawful where the wager or deal is made. Some wagers might be lawful while others might not be lawful. It's as straightforward as that.
The UIGEA had some result on Web gaming, because numerous effective firms left business, a minimum of in the USA. As a matter of fact, with the flow of the legislation in 2006, a lot of UNITED STATE online gamers discovered they can not dip into an on the internet casino site or casino poker area, momentarily. Most of the betting suppliers discovered methods to develop workplaces and also web servers beyond the UNITED STATE to ensure that can welcome USA gamers back in.
Damage Time
It's currently time to quit, take a deep breath and also look to Net betting legislations in the numerous states. Some have actually passed their very own policies as well as policies (prior to as well as after UIGEA). In a couple of states, business can not run an on the internet betting service. In various other states it is prohibited for a specific to position a wager making use of the Internet. Some legal experts suggest that these individual-state policies are unconstitutional because business throughout state lines need to just be managed by government regulation, not state legislation. Business on the internet betting companies do not run in the USA, nevertheless. If you wish to see their "office" you might need to take a trip to Malta, Gibraltar or Curacoa.

The 2005 U.K. regulation usually permits remote websites such as these. The guidelines are not so unwinded in the UNITED STATE Nonetheless, a current appellate court judgment in the UNITED STATE states that, in a minimum of one instance, an Online gaming website did not go against states regulations. Many lawful minds advise bettors and also others curious about the concern to remain tuned.

Some have actually offered their interest to discovering advantages of legalized gaming, keeping in mind that this big market may be an essential to financial recuperation in the USA. At the heart of their disagreement are instances such as well-known lotto games run by different states, along with the federal government incomes that move in to state funds from riverboats and also land-based casino sites.

Part of this initiative hinges on the shoulders of greater than 100 lawful agents helping good sense in Net wagering regulations. This heap of lawyers has the job of attempting to maintain the Globe Wide Web/Internet devoid of federal government treatment.

Bob Ciaffone is taken into consideration among the specialists when it come to betting as well as casino poker generally, as well as on the shift to on the internet betting. He recommends that any kind of policy of Online betting must minimize competitors from outside the UNITED STATE, to ensure that the residents of the UNITED STATE would certainly profit in lawful betting states. His in-depth strategy would certainly parallel the U.K. circumstance because that nation passed its 2005 regulations. Ciaffone likewise highly advises UNITED STATE legislators to maintain Net betting regulations different from the 40-year-old Cord Act, which was passed to manage unlawful gaming over the telephone.

Basically, Ciaffone creates that the UIGEA tried to do the appropriate point, however does it in all the upside-down. The constraints have actually drastically burdened what could be a fantastic profits resource with correct guideline, according to Ciaffone.

Think about a declaration on the UIGEA from the most-recognizable online poker gamer worldwide, Doyle Brunson. Though is remarks put on his preferred video game of casino poker, they can conveniently associate with all Net betting legislations. He claimed, fundamentally, that his firm obtained great lawful suggestions that suggests Net casino poker is not "specifically" unlawful. He motivates UNITED STATE gamers to find out the legislations of their very own state.

I posted this as a reply to a "people freak about lettuce but not guns" post. Z0idberg_MD gave a reply that I haven't posted back to because I felt getting other opinions was better than hijacking someone elses post with this. The following is my original post as well as the reply from Z0idberg_MD which I will follow up with my reply. I am adding it all for context and for quoting purposes. Sorry in advance for the long post.

An estimated 600,920 people were killed by cancer last year. 155,870 (highest of one type) from Lung & Bronchus. Mostly related to Cigarettes which are said to account for 480,000 deaths 41,000 from second hand smoke. Cigarettes can be bought everywhere and are easy to get without ID.
15,548 deaths in 2017 from guns when excluding suicide (~39,000-40,000 with them) Guns really aren’t as easy to get hands on as people seem to think.
Any deaths are a bad thing and the sooner we address the actual issues the better or the problems will never be solved.
I have used guns since I was 5 and the only things, I have killed are animals I was going to eat or animals attacking the cattle on the family ranch. People rip on the AR-15 saying nobody needs a gun like that but I am inclined to disagree. When you deal with things like coyote you need something capable. The .22 can hold more ammo but doesn't have the range to kill coyote from across two 40-acre plots of land (the ranch is divided up in 40s for grazing and baling purposes) my 410 is good for small animals (squirrel, rabbit, moles, etc.) My .243 has the range and power but is bolt action and only holds 5 rounds and I can use a Bow quicker than I can the bolt. The AR-15 is semi-auto and can get the distance so when dealing with a pack of coyote with 7 of them trying to attack cattle you don't have to stop to reload or try to get closer.
Every gun I have bought I have had to wait a week for a background check. Sure, I can go to a gun show instead of a store but the show's a lot of time will also make you wait for the base background check to be run before you can get a gun. They also tag the guns going in and out. (Not to the owner just noting what guns are bought. I know it isn't necessarily a security thing but like cameras all around watching you, it is a deterrent) People looking for illegal guns don't go to these places.
There is the argument that Chicago only has an issue because you can just go the next state over and get a gun but those states also have the same federally mandated background checks. The guns in Chicago more often than not are either illegal or stolen (making them illegal) from a legal owner. Those shooters aren't crossing state lines to purchase legally.
The other argument is that people should lock up their guns in a safe. A gun is useless for defense if you can't access it easily. You can be safe without putting it behind a 12-inch-thick metal door. I have two kids but I teach them not to touch the guns without me and how to properly use a gun. My guns are not in a safe and do not have trigger locks. They are in an area accessible to me and the ammo is easily gotten even though it is not beside the guns. I am teaching my children exactly like I was taught and my dad was taught as well as his dad and grandpa. None of our guns have killed anyone.
A lot of the stigma, I fell, around guns is the fact that in larger cities people don't tend to do things like hunt so they also don't learn to use a gun and see no reason in having one. In the rural areas it is different. I understand the arguments posed but at the same time if you take guns away from people that doesn't make shootings not happen. Even then if the gun crime decreases a different form will increase. (Crossbow, bow, knife, cattle prod, machete, bombs) Hell my wife is more likely to grab a knife or sword to kill someone than a gun.
When my cousin was in school he used to go raccoon hunting before school started and he would bring his gun and dead raccoons to school prop his gun by the classroom door and tie the raccoons to his desk. This was just in the 60s. The issues facing these things today spur some from the stigma but also from the lack of discipline. My cousin could take his gun because had he ever tried to use it there were multiple other boys that would stop him but also the teacher would have beat him into the next week. Look at schools now and how teachers are scared of students or how students will beat the shit out of each other with the teacher just saying "stop please, I am calling the police" which then puts kids into the system because the teachers instead of disciplining are just having kids arrested.
We avoid topics like mental health or PTSD while also trying to punish bullies (with cops again) Punishing the bully doesn't fix the mental damage suffered and it also doesn’t address the issues plaguing the bully. Communities don't work together to stop things they just call the police and hope it gets fixed. The more these things happen the more they try to push it on the police. Laws get altered that give the police more control of the punishing aspects and then when a child is in the system they yell and scream about injustice. Parents don't want to parent though.
I know an Officer in my city that got a call to deal with a kid. He got to the house and the Mom told the Officer "He won't obey, he just back talk’s me and refuses to listen. I have told him 10 times to clean his room and he refuses"
The Officer talked to the kid found he was a little rebellious but mostly because his parents had recently split up and his dad had always been the one to punish if the boy didn't listen. He told the kid to straighten up and act as if his dad were there and think how he would be punished if he acted out against his mom with him there.
He left and a few hours later got called back with the Mom complaining about the same thing. She said "did you even do anything last time you were here?" He asked what he was supposed to do to which she replied "Punish him somehow. Make him understand he can't talk to adults like that."
The Officer proceeded to take off his belt and fold it in his hands, as he walked toward the kid the Mom flipped out and screamed at him "OMG! WHAT ARE YOU DOING???"
He said "Punishing him like you asked"
She said "I didn't mean beat him"
He replied with "I was only going to give him a whooping. What were you expecting me to do?"
The mom who had been so angry at her son said "I figured you would arrest him or something"
The Officer said "For what? Disobedience? Back talking? My Mom would have slapped me across the room for acting like that. I am not giving your child a record for back talking."
The Mom snipped back saying "I don't mean actually arrest him. I meant just arrest him and take him to jail to scare him"
The Officer was furious. Explained that the cops were not their to supplement when parents don't want to be mean. He gave her a warning for improper use of 911 services. (not sure if that’s possible but he was probably just trying to beat it into her)
This is the type of thing I mean when I say it is discipline.
I don't want people to die any more than the rest of the civilized sane people in this country but playing the this kills x but this kills y game is stupid. The number one cause of death isn’t the cigarettes or the guns (or lettuce) it is the people behind those things. The cigarette can't light itself and the gun can't fire itself (The lettuce can grow itself but it can't clean and test itself) they need people and until the human problem is fixed all of these arguments about buying guns or the like are 100% moot. If we aren't willing to help those in need mentally or even physically and we keep acting like a gun is anything more than a tool like a wrench, hammer, hatchet or chainsaw than these shootings and crimes will never stop. Maybe instead of arguing this politically just to get upvotes we should look at it medically and try to find a real solution.
If you don't like guns, fine. Nobody is forcing you to have one but don't act like you are morally superior just because you don't like them.

Reply from Z0idberg_MD
Who said morally superior? They make society less safe without a whole lot of demonstrable "good".
\ Correlation between suicide and firearm ownership rate*
[Conclusions. We found a strong relationship between state-level firearm ownership and firearm suicide rates among both genders, and a relationship between firearm ownership and suicides by any means among male, but not female, individuals] (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4984734/)
\ Permissive gun laws lead to more homicides*
[Conclusions. Shall-issue laws are associated with significantly higher rates of total, firearm-related, and handgun-related homicide.] (https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304057)
\ The largest gun study in history on more guns = more firearm homicide*
[Results. Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%.] (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828709/)

First and foremost, let me thank you for properly providing sources. Actual non-bias ones that are out to provide data not to specifically take a side.
I said morally superior. Strictly in context of the original post acting like pulling a dangerous lettuce that anyone could buy was equitable to buying a gun.
It's not.
#1. Personally, I ignore suicide in gun numbers in gun debates and I only added them for those interested. Suicide is a separate issue from homicide so putting them together in my view just skews numbers and distracts from one conversation such as this one about guns. Suicide can be viewed, that is fine, but only so long as it is viewed separate from gun violence as a whole. People who fully intend to commit suicide will do it regardless. I have no argument with the statement that having access to a gun while suicidal will raise the chance of one committing suicide. However, that also loops to my statements about mental instabilities and if we paid more attention to things such as PTSD and Depression than things might be different.
#2. In my opinion you shouldn't get a concealed permit without taking classes and it should 100% be up to a criminal background check to decide if you have one. Most the concealed classes around me are taught by active Police officers and the rest tend to be handled by retired ones.
Carrying a gun requires you to have some idea of responsibility but that is, unfortunately, not always how it works. That said limitations that are placed through recent legislation tend to be overly vague and are more harmful than they are good. Saying "People with mental illnesses shouldn't have access to guns" is well past overly vague. There are people that compete in the Special Olympics sport shooting competitions that would fall under that blanket law. “Mental illnesses” is a pretty vague term for law. When it comes to language in law, terminology is everything. With a law that simply states “mental illness” we would have to use something as a reference. Most likely the DSM-5 as it is the most comprehensive and as such all of these would fall under it:

Acute Stress Disorder
Adjustment Disorder
Adult Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Agoraphobia
Alcohol/Substance Abuse
Alcohol/Substance Dependence
Alzheimer’s Disease
Anorexia Nervosa
Antisocial Personality Disorder
Anxiety Disorders
Attachment Disorder
Autism
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Avoidant Personality Disorder
Bereavement
Binge Eating Disorder
Bipolar Disorder
Body Dysmorphic Disorder
Borderline Personality Disorder
Brief Psychotic Disorder
Bulimia Nervosa
Circadian Rhythm Sleep-Wake Disorder
Conduct Disorder
Conversion Disorder
Cyclothymic Disorder
Delusional Disorder
Dependent Personality Disorder
Depersonalization Disorder
Depression
Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder
Disorder of Written Expression
Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder
Dissociative Amnesia
Dissociative Disorder Not Otherwise Specified
Dissociative Fugue
Dissociative Identity Disorder
Dyspareunia
Dysthymic Disorder
Encopresis
Enuresis
Erectile Disorder
Exhibitionistic Disorder
Expressive Language Disorder
Female & Male Orgasmic Disorders
Female Sexual Arousal Disorder
Fetishistic Disorder
Frotteuristic Disorder
Gaming Disorder
Gender Dysphoria
Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Histrionic Personality Disorder
Hoarding Disorder
Hypersomnolence
Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder
Hypochondriasis
Insomnia Disorder
Intermittent Explosive Disorder
Kleptomania
Major Neurocognitive Disorder
Mathematics Disorder
Mental Retardation
Minor Neurocognitive Disorder
Multiple Personality Disorder
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Narcolepsy
New Specifiers of Bipolar Disorder and Depression
Nightmare Disorder
Non-Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Arousal Disorders
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder
Oppositional Defiant Disorder
Pain Disorder
Panic Attack
Panic Disorder
Paranoid Personality Disorder
Parkinson’s Disease
Pathological Gambling
Pedophilia
Phobias
Pica
Postpartum Depression
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Premature Ejaculation
Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder
Pseudobulbar Affect
Psychotic Disorders
Pyromania
Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behavior Disorder
Reactive Attachment Disorder
Reading Disorder
Restless Legs Syndrome
Rumination Disorder
Schizoaffective Disorder
Schizoid Personality Disorder
Schizophrenia
Schizophreniform Disorder
Schizotypal Personality Disorder
Seasonal Affective Disorder
Selective Mutism
Separation Anxiety Disorder
Sexual Masochism and Sadism
Shared Psychotic Disorder
Social Communication Disorder
Social Anxiety Phobia
Somatic Symptom Disorder
Stereotypic Movement Disorder
Stuttering
Tourette’s Disorder
Transient Tic Disorder
Transvestic Disorder
Trichotillomania
Vaginismus
Voyeuristic Disorder

I understand it is a hassle to name all the specific illnesses that shouldn't have a gun but if we just left it with mental illness many people who have never had any problems would lose access to them and it would eventually be thrown out in the Supreme Court. We could hope that if we used a blanket term it wouldn't be misused but in time it would eventually be that way. If only to stack charges. People with Depression and Schizophrenia would be obvious ones to prevent due to the nature of the disorder but what about Bipolar? Something easily controlled with medication. Would that be ok? Someone with ADHD, Tourette’s, Social Anxiety, Erectile Dysfunction or even Transgenders (Gender Dysphoria), should they be put under this blanketed ban of mental illness? Because history shows you that blanket laws are taken advantage of, a prime example is Civil Forfeiture laws.
I am not one of those people against all gun laws but I am against the “Common Sense” gun law statements and the fight to ban guns completely. Common Sense gun reform sounds good but people always take it off the deep end and then start attacking the second amendment. The only way to get rid of the second amendment would be to rewrite the constitution after a civil war or to rewrite it with the purpose of starting a civil war because the gun owners in this country would overwhelmingly oppose that option no matter what. For arguments sake though using the Huffington Post as an example of how crazy people can be when talking about this topic, this is the list from the article (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-j-blumenfeld/proposals-for-common-sens_b_8231786.html)
We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons!
Automatic Weapons are highly restricted. To buy and sell you have to have a Federal Firearms License or they have to be registered gun made before 1986 (assuming they can even be owned in your state) You have to inform the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of your area that one is being purchased. A form has to be filled out with the ATF ($200 for tax, fingerprints, passport style photo, and information on the firearm are all part of this form) Then you have to wait up to a year for it to be approved. All of that is assuming you can afford one seeing as the bans on them have made them extremely expensive. (A standard AR-15 usually runs $800-$1000 brand new, A fully automatic made before 1986 will be $20,000-$35,000)
Saying Semi-automatic Weapons is about as bad as saying mental illness. Semi-Auto is defined as an automatic loading weapon that fires one bullet per trigger pull whereas Fully Auto is more than one bullet per trigger pull. So, by this writers’ definition we are left with bolt action (which people can fire at high rates very easily) and muzzleloaders. Pistol wise you are basically left with a derringer. There are derringers that shoot .410 shotgun shells and a muzzleloader can be a .32 all the way to a .58 caliber. All of which can do some damage and depending on the user can be reloaded faster than most people can get away. What works in favor of the Semi-Auto is that you don’t have to be as accurate with your aim.
We must close loopholes such as buying a weapon at a gun show!
Private sale between 2 private owners is an option when both are in the same state regardless of being at a gun show. Most dealers at gun shows are FFL gun dealers and they have to do a background check on you under the requirements. Not preforming one is against the law and they will lose their license as well as be charged with the unlawful sale of a firearm. Is this saying it isn't possible? No. Likely? Also no. If you crossed state lines and bought a gun the sale has to be processed by an FFL in your home state. FFLs aren't just selling to criminals and ne’er-do-wells. Gun Shows make it easier for FFLs to find buyers for the product they have in their stores. Believe it or not gun shops aren't multi-million-dollar cash machines sometimes change of venue gets your product sold.
We must ban the purchase of firearms and ammunition on the internet!
Again, to sell across state lines an FFL has to be involved even when purchasing online. The idea that you can just hop online and buy a gun like you were shopping on Amazon. Ammunition wise I am not really sure what that has to do with anything because you can always reload ammo so banning online sale won’t solve anything.
We must increase the waiting period and make background checks more rigorous and effective!
As I said in my last post, I have had to wait a week every gun I have bought. It isn't like the background checks are simple little papers that aren't actually looked at. If it is effectiveness you are wanting, the background check is only as good as the information reported on it just like a credit score. Make mental health record of certain types mandatory to report and all police records considered such as tickets for Jaywalking.
We must limit the number of firearms any individual can own!
Not really realistic but sure I will bite. Limit to what. Who decides this number? As in my first post all the guns I use have specific purposes. If I own 1 gun or 50 of them what difference would it make with the exception of there being 50 less guns on the streets to be used in a crime? I know it could be argued that everyone has the potential to commit a crime with a gun and that it is more likely dependent on the number of guns in one’s possession but this isn't a Tom Cruise movie and pre-crime isn't a thing. At that rate what is stopping us from limiting how many kitchen knives you have? You only really need one and as long as it cuts what’s the difference?
We must limit the number of bullets any firearm clip can hold!
I am not sure what limiting the number of bullets in a clip is going to do with the exception of making people insert bullets into their magazine slower. Clips are nice but I personally don’t use them. Having 2 smaller magazines for the AR-15 covers 20 rounds for me and I rarely if ever shoot enough to constitute being able to use a clip to quickly reload my magazines. Other people might have a need for this but even then, if you limited a clip to 5 bullets you are just telling me I need 2 clips to feed my magazines not 1. (I 100% understand that this writer was making the statement about magazines and not clips but this perfectly illustrates my point on why language used is important.)
We must ban and criminalize the purchase and possession of armor piercing bullets, and also hollow-tip bullets!
There is a lot to unpack here but I will keep it simple. Bullets kill regardless of the type and again with language saying Armor Piercing has wide connotations. True Armor Piercing rounds have a steel core instead of the standard soft lead and are designed to penetrate light armor.
While if you are talking about bullets that can penetrate things like Kevlar you are talking about anything larger than the standard .22. The AR-15 uses .223 ammo which in essence is a .22 bullet. The difference is that .223 is high velocity and the bullet tends to come to a point. It comes in a Round Nose (Used mostly in handgun ammo) and a Boat Tail (Used mostly in rifle ammo) The average owner will most likely have Full Metal Jacket ammo which sounds scary but for the most part it is a lead bullet with a copper coating on the outside it has nothing to do with Armor Piercing ability. If you shot a standard .22 round and a .223 the .22 would do more visual damage entry wise and would also more than likely not exit at all.
Hollow Point bullets are common for self-defense and also used by police because unlike FMJ they have stopping power on impact. As they hit, they expand and take up more area meaning they are less likely to do damage outside of the impact zone. They are safer to use for self-defense because you will be able to stop your attacker without having to worry as much about bystanders These bullets aren't made for long range shooting.
Banning and criminalizing two types of bullet is pointless unless you are doing it to all ammo. The writer misses Open Tip, Soft Point and Ballistic Tip ammunition as well as Shotgun shells which have Birdshot, buckshot and Slugs (A typical 12 Gauge slug is .73 caliber) Which in the right hands can be just as dangerous as a typical rifle.
We must rethink the “logic” of permitting concealed weapons, especially in places like houses of worship, colleges, bars, restaurants, and political rallies!
Yes, we should. Many shootings happen in gun free zones Reason being that the person wanting to do maximum damage will go where they are less likely to receive resistance. The Gun-Free Zone is implemented with good intentions but that also paves the road to hell. It is a matter of criminals are criminals because they don’t follow the law. No mass shooter has seen a “Gun-Free Zone” sign and though ‘Well shit, there goes that idea’
We must interface all data bases monitoring firearm ownership to assess the firearm-owning population more accurately and effectively!
As mentioned above, criminals are criminals because they don’t follow the law. This would be fought as an invasion of privacy almost immediately and wouldn't contribute to anything more than tracking law abiding citizens and their gun ownership. Do you think the criminals are letting the government know the use and sale of their guns? Yes, this writer is stating that we pull all the databases we already have together but he is also implying that it should be easily accessible for research which, as said, is an invasion of privacy.
It isn't to say that I disagree with gun laws entirely it is just stating that there is more to the issue than simply banning things that are used by mass shooters. Someone wanting to deal damage will figure out a way. If we are banning like the article suggest we are left with Shotguns, Derringers, Bolt action rifles and Cannons. It also ignores Swords, Knives, Chainsaws, Sledge Hammers, Flamethrowers, RPGs, Tanks, Bows and Crossbows, 3D Printed weapons, Lawnmower blades, Planks of Wood with Nails in them, Baseball bats with barb wire and Potato Guns just to name a few. It also doesn't account for bombs or chemical weapons made with household products such as Ammonia and Bleach or Bleach and Alcohol. All in all, the weapon of choice isn't the problem as none of them can act independently. Humans will always find a way to be the biggest assholes they can be should the need, in their mind, arise.
Looking at recent mass shootings, how many could have been avoided had people been less selfish and paid attention to the signs pointing to problematic mental health issues? How many could have been avoided if we just taught parents to be parents instead of letting them rely on the government to be the babysitter. I agree that not all people need guns but proper education would help too. Instead we yell and scream that guns are bad and kill people so we should remove them from the hands of the public. I would love to see the study supporting the idea that guns kill people.
#3. EXTREMELY interesting study. It is almost too smart for its own good though. More guns = more firearm homicide. What is wrong with that statement? More knives = more knife homicides. More car bombs = more blown up cars. The study had the proper idea but they implemented it wrong merely in the way we can break down their study and say something as vague as more guns = more firearm homicide.
Going back to my original post I covered this slightly. In rural America you have many towns where the firearm to citizen ratio is 1:1 or higher. Even taking states you have places like Wyoming where the registered guns to citizens is ~230:1. Whereas larger population states like California and New York are ~9:1 and ~4:1 respectively. (Oddly enough referring back to the Automatic weapon point the Top 5 states with Machine guns: 1. Connecticut - 52,965, 2. Texas – 36,534, 3. Florida – 36,194, 4. Virginia – 34,074, 5. Illinois 33,646. Though, California is really close to the Top 5 at #7 – 29,047.) (https://huntingmark.com/gun-ownership-stats/#_ftn1%20)
The top 5 most dangerous cities (According to Forbes) and their state rank of registered gun owners are:

City Rank	State Rank
1 Detroit, MI	45. Michigan - 6.59:1
2 St. Louis, MO	36. Missouri - 11.94:1
3. Oakland, CA	44. California - 8.71:1
4. Memphis, TN	33. Tennessee - 14.76:1
5. Birmingham AL.	6. Alabama - 33.15:1

The study you reference while giving very helpful and valid data wasn't quite as valid as it could have been. The information is definitely there to produce solid evidence should you combine the data with other studies. I don’t see it as one sided but I do think they failed to include information that might have changed the data.

Various conventional gambling organisations constructed on the sidelines as the Web supported and also failed to get advantage of the fresh devices for their industries. It had not been waiting for 1996 that a corporation named Inter Casino activated the earliest online video game. After the main online gambling site had actually released, lots of firms started hurrying to web link in on the act.
One of the basis casino games online
Turned into beauty is that competitor can take part from all over? You don't need taking a trip to a casino game area in command to participate casino video games. The raising fame of poker as well included in the status of on-line video gaming sites, because it was extremely straightforward for individuals to dip into these casino games on-line as well as they established rapidly. People adore gambling and also casino video games on-line authorized them a basic methods to do it. Casino video games online will provide so much satisfaction that it will be nearly difficult to leave it. Not just that casino video games online is one of the most clearable video games worldwide.
Hundreds of top-notch on-line video game Malaysia to choose from nowadays as well as to discover the precise website for you may resemble an incredible mission. Nevertheless, reducing down the features you are looking for will certainly assist you situate the ideal casino video games on-line fit for your wish. Ahead of looking for reasons, it is as well substantial to determine which sites are legitimate and also legal and also which sites are not. It is tough to state precisely what produces an outstanding online video game since varied individuals have diverse main worries in views to what an online video game casino need to offer.
Casino on the internet lead is divided right into diverse segments to create it easier for you to hastily and also simply locate the sites that you actually interested. Whether you are a gambling beginner or a casino professional, it is certain that you'll find this casino channel a valuable source. There are online websites Malaysia as well that has casino pc gaming volume which contains casino tickets to maintain you cash when you see them.
Illegal Net Gambling Enforcement Act
As Unlawful Web Gambling Enforcement Act turned into a credibility in year 2006, it developed into dramatically even more inflexible for U.S.A. gambling establishments online to confess entertainers. Nevertheless, it is a deception that on-line pc gaming gambling establishments have become prohibited in U.S.A.. If you are not from U.S.A. you can likewise play in U.S.A. casino sites. It will be a dream come to life if you can play in UNITED STATES casinos.
USA online casinos are the residence of site players as well as there are many online casinos online where you have the ability to situate some high classification casino sites where US players are licensed to get involved. The accurate legal condition concerning to U.S.A. casinos online differs from every state however despite of your residence state whichever guideline touching casino online games made use of to influence the casino sites as well as financial establishments as well as not the participants themselves.
With the appearance of the online casino, individuals do not need to fly or drive to a faraway casino to play their preferred video games. Altering times and also new advancements resulted in the development and popularity of the net online casinos these days. Thinking about the present situation, the online casino has developed as the most enjoyable and enticing methods to take a look at a number of prominent casino video games under one roofing.
Gone are those days when you had to prepare for a vacation or vacation to travel to an area fresh Jacket or Las Vegas preferred for supplying the enjoyment of real gambling establishments. Nevertheless, it is apparent that while planning a vacation, you needed to deposit your main commitments. It is more likely that taking a trip regularly leaving behind all your jobs might not be possible constantly.
The introduction of the internet casino or more commonly the online casino gets rid of a lot of inconveniences for the gamers making it far more easy for them to reach out their preferred game any time and at any area. Furthermore, you do not require to take a trip right to any kind of physical casino to play your casino video game. Having a computer system with internet connection can put an end to all these issues.
Casino online offers you access to a lot of gambling sites on the net. If you're 21 (the considered legal age of gambling) after that you are ready to start with the online casino games. You must recognize that dipping into any online casino website brings about a lot of benefits for the gamers.
Taking a look on the major advantages of the on the internet gambling establishments will assist you to recognize why this implies of gambling has expanded so preferred. Why is it one of the most preferred choice for many casino players worldwide? Well, in the following lines you will certainly discover the most common benefits that on-line gambling brings you ahead. These include
Playing at your ease:
One of the main features of casino online that makes the majority of pc gaming fans to count on gambling online is that the internet creates to be one of the most convenient tool nowadays. The online casino forms to be an essential way allowing increasingly more players to bet easily from their own house. Till you're connected to the net, you can play your popular casino video games 24x7. You simply have to go into a website and also start with your chosen casino games.
Promo and perks
The online gambling bonus offers verify to be one of the most appealing alternatives to pick having fun online. You will certainly never ever be finding these type of options in any kind of brick and mortar casino. Currently, you are supplied a series of perks like down payment match bonus, register perk or welcome bonus, no down payment benefit ad money back bonus. These promos can be a wonderful way to attract a growing number of brand-new gamers and hang on to the existing gamers as well. With benefits, the gamers can easily boost the money as they have a lot more cash in hand to bet.
Extra choice of casinos
With the web gambling establishments, you will certainly obtain an option of even more gambling establishments at once. You can also switch over to one site to another as it depends only on your desire.
Hassle-free and also easy withdrawal and also down payment alternatives:
On-line casinos brings you a lot of banking choices to make your option. Several online casino websites approve Master and Visa credit cards for both withdrawal as well as deposit functions. Other popular choices offered consist of wire transfer, NeTeller, myCitadel, Moneybookers, Entropay as well as others.
If you have actually ever before wagered previously, you recognize the significance of choosing the ideal sports agent to manage your bets. On the other hand, if you haven't wagered before, you go to least interested if picking the best sports bookie can make such a drastic distinction.
Despite which is it, via the next paragraphs we will certainly be specifying the aspects of a good sports representative, which need to enable you to pick a sports bookie that feels right to you.
First off, you need to establish whether you wish to deal with a "traditional sports bookie" or a sportsbook. By "standard sports bookie" I am describing people who have a tendency to a few unique clients, and already, I'll describe them as sport bookies or bookies (even if sportsbooks can be classified as sporting activity bookmakers as well).
Before moving on, let me offer a word of caution; if bookies are not enabled to exercise their occupation in your nation (or state/city), do not bet with them. Although you will probably have the ability to find sports bookies that works "in the shadows" within your city, if he gets caught you could shed money.
Continuing with the main subject, both alternatives present benefits and also disadvantages for us as clients.
Allow's begin by evaluating sportsbooks advantages and also disadvantages.
Sportsbooks (at the very least the ones with a solid track record) manage 10s or numerous hundreds of gamers at any type of provided moment, which means they create even more revenue and can pay for to pay when you win. Likewise, they have customer support representatives offered 24/7. If you incorporate those two variables with the reality that you can put your bet in a matter of seconds - either by calling or online -, their benefit comes to be quite obvious when taking into consideration comfort as an aspect.
On the other hand, sportsbooks will certainly never be able to use you personalized attention.
What's more, sportsbooks typically charge a set amount when you want to withdraw your cash. If you are a high-roller you won't also observe the distinction, however if you are gambling with percentages as well as aiming to take out simply a few hundred bucks you will certainly observe it.
Moving the spotlight over to sports bookies, it can be stated that these deal less advantages and more disadvantages; yet, some individuals choose to bet with them.
When using the services offered by a bookie in order to wager, your bet will certainly have a greater expense. Since these are "independent service providers" and also they give their services to a limited amount of clients, they bill higher costs in order to compensate for a lack of quantity.
Then, utilizing their services suggests a higher danger relating to not getting paid. They could quickly "vanish" in an immediate if they want.
Simply two adverse elements remain. First, they will put limits on wagers (often), as well as 2nd, it's hard to get in touch with them in some cases.
Now let's speak about the few benefits that are obtained when picking a sporting activities bookie as opposed to a sportsbook.
When "working" with a sporting activities bookie, there is no record of your incomes or losses. This means you can win millions as well as stay clear of paying any of it in taxes (not strictly lawful though). Also, because they have less clients (generally a really choose list), they tend to supply a customized solution.
A word of caution; sports bookies have a tendency to be quite skilled in the art of seduction. That does not indicate you'll be taking your trousers off, yet they can be encourage you into betting for a certain group, so beware of that skill.
Essentially, the benefits of picking a "traditional sports bookie" as your method are reduced to preventing tax obligations as well as personalized attention.
That's why I stated that sports bookies are not the noticeable choice, however many individuals favor them.
If you are going to choose a "traditional bookie", don't let them understand where you live, how much cash you make, or any type of delicate information; no matter if s/he becomes your "friend" for a while.
Additionally, make sure they are providing you a bargain, or else it isn't worth your time.
On the other hand, if you're taking the sensible course and choosing a sportsbook rather, it's just a matter of choosing a business that's been more than 10 years on the marketplace as well as has a great reputation amongst gamblers.
In the past, it was difficult for those who intend to place their bank on their favorite groups without making it through the conventional route - sporting activities wagering bookie. Today, one can now have access to genuine on the internet sporting activities wagering bookie - referred to as gaming house in betting parlance.
For those that are new to this form of online betting, it is important to note that there is even more to it than just locating the possible winning picks and obtaining your payouts. There are various other elements of the on-line betting procedure that require to be thought about especially by those that are doing sporting activities investing for the first time.
For instance, payments for football stakes are not necessarily made on straight wagers which as usually defined as wagers that have no variations as well as totally based on the final result of the game. Probabilities as well as spreads enter play in the betting process and this is where sporting activities wagering bookie participates in the picture. A genuine as well as strong on the internet bookie will certainly provide equitable betting lines that will make sure fair game for stakeholder including your house as well as gamers.
One may question why straight bets are not involved. Clearly, there are teams that carry out far better than the rest as well as if you have group that totes a 12-0 win-loss slate deals with another team with 1-11 win-loss document, 9 out of every 10 wagers would be going with the team with the much better win-loss document. This can not be maintained over time and will inevitably break the bank if the favored group appears victorious. This "imbalance" generates wagering lines and chances.
The sports bookie will essentially provide gaming fanatics with a line where the favored team is burdened. This handicapping process eliminates some factors off the preferred group and given to the group that is thought about an underdog. This is the adverse figure that is normally designated to the favored team and also factored into the last end result of the match.
The lines and odds are not randomly selected by the on the internet sports wagering bookie. The numerical variety is acquired after complete research study and also careful consideration of the gamer schedules, injury reports, win-loss records and also various other considerable criteria.
Locating the right online bookie is not a simple task. Actually, betting experts specify the experience as some type of finding the proverbial needle in a haystack. This indicates that the task require a lot of research study and also you will be at the top of your game once you have finished your job.
For More Information Visit Here

There are a lot of important reasons to recognize the state of online gambling in the world. Similarly, it can consume you plenty of time and money, for you will have to do an exhaustive inquiry about the topic. Knowing the advantages will differ from reason to reason, because it relies on your main objective. It is capable, for instance, of updating you on the latest about gambling, but your country not included. It is also capable, depending on the country's pro or con provisions, in updating you where you can run into more gamblers. It is essential for you to know what's new about the online gambling world, if you are declaring yourself to be a real online gambler.
General View of the Online Gambling World
The UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act), which is currently perhaps the worst and most glaring issue, will catch your attention when viewing the online gambling world in general. The issue really only pertains directly to the US. On the other hand, this act extends its fangs as well to the international community. Basically, crushed UIGEA makes hard the task of transferring money to gambling sites through certain banking options. It has been valid, even though in a very unclear and ineffective way, as of 2007.
What's the result? The closing down of online gambling sites since the stock market investments' drastic reduction, the prohibition of a large number of players (particularly in the US) to play in online gambling sites, and having lesser places to gamble in for players in various countries. The effect of UIGEA, is seemingly, far beyond of certain US players being banned on online gambling. The community has also been affected by it in general and several sites has ended.
Specifying the Online Gambling World
You are most likely wondering what's going-on in some countries, after a having an idea of what exactly is going on in the online gambling world. To make matters clear, the UIGEA has not stopped US players from gambling online. Truly, persistent activity exists since several US states do not prohibit people from it.
To make up for the strict measures employed by countries like the US are places that even encourage and use it as a shooting point for its prosperity. These places include Barbuda and Antigua, both in Caribbean. Online gambling has been booming on both places, for a long time already. In fact, there are many online casinos that have been licensed in Caribbean. This is because of their breezy transactions and low taxes.
Online gambling is not prohibited in several other countries along with Antigua and Barbuda. The following countries which allow this form of gambling are South Korea, Germany, Australia, and several other countries. Maybe they know its inherent potential to enhance the welfare of their countries.
Future of Online Gambling
A lot of debates about the stability of the industry have been created. The proof, nevertheless, of what is real and true already emphasizes it. In spite of the few obstructions it is now undergoing, online gambling will surely prosper and thrive. Should it come out of these trials, it will be an even stronger and more lucrative industry.

It is significant to learn where online gambling is in today's highly commercialized world. This is not an easy discussion and will require us to expend time and effort if we were to seek enlightenment on this matter. But this knowledge is relevant for beginners, players, and casinos themselves. For instance, such information can give you a perception of gambling, not only in the country but in the entire world. Statistics can give you information regarding the kind of gamblers casinos have and the overall gambling behavior of the populace. If you are an interested online gambler, you should keep yourself updated to the latest news.
Looking at the General Picture of the Online Gambling Realm
At the present, creative gamblers around the world are flustered at the approval of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which prohibits Americans from gambling games online and which seems the most pressing issue concerning the gambling public. Nonetheless, the bill targets only the American citizens and the US gambling and casino market. But the implications of this law spread globally. One of the notable effects is the higher stringency in money transferring procedure and banking options in gambling sites. This started in 2007 though in a vague, confusing manner. The outcome is the closure of online gambling sites as a result of reduction of stocks brought about by diminishing market as the US bans its people to join online gambling. Gambling sites outside United States also forbids registration of US players. Indeed, the effects of UIGEA travelled beyond the bounds of America, affecting worldwide gambling industry, impairing more casino sites than it ought to be.
Gambling on the Internet
So, you may want to check out how gambling is prospering in other nations which have continued the tradition of gambling. American gamblers are not entirely banned from joining the gambling sites and that should be clear. Some states still allow people to gamble despite the presence of UIGEA, which is not fully implemented across the nation. More countries around the globe are promoting casinos to compensate the dire slump in the US casino market. These countries include Barbuda and Antigua in the Caribbean area, where online gambling has been long successful and flourishing. The Caribbean has some of the best licensed online casinos whose boom has been due to low taxes and speedy transactions. Of course, apart from this Caribbean country, there are more countries that allow online gambling and online casinos to operate, such as France, Australia, South Korea, and Germany. These countries have long seen the economic advantage of supporting this kind of market.
Future of Gambling
The stability of both land based and online casinos is a subject of continuing debate. There is much discussion regarding the real economic benefits of promoting casinos and letting them thrive in the commercial scene. There is also an argument regarding the pros and cons of having them around and whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages or is it the other way around. Nonetheless, experts believe that online gambling and roulette are sure to be around for a while and that this industry remains prosperous no matter what.

It's rare that a GTAO DLC drought/announcement/debut is without discussion of additions the players want to see. It could be something base to the idea of the series like a car (to all you PMP 600 fans), an additional game mode or an alteration to an existing one (Cops & Robbers for instance) or the opening of an entirely new property asset-in this case, the casino.
While we can speculate all we want, there are tremendous obstacles in place an online-focused GTA casino would face operating in the sense that many of us would like:

Issue 1: GTAO is Global

While many of us are quick to disparage Rockstar, they have created a global online community that is still one of the most prominent gaming choices for console players- even roughly five years later.
If we were to focus on one country, the United States is slowly adopting sports-based gambling laws on a state level after the repeal of PASPA earlier in May this year. Skin gambling continues to be a contentious issue & studios have taken their share of flak over lootboxes & P2P/P2W practices.
That Tyson vs. Secretariat fight took place in international waters, but there's not many publicly traded companies that are willing to stake their business by operating their servers off-shore.
There is no "across the board" solution for a media product like this that could take money for traditional variable wagering worldwide.

Issue 2: Player Funds- Purchase vs. Earned

Continuing a viewpoint from the U.S., there would be an integral problem if Rockstar would allow wagering at a variable player interval with GTA$ purchased with actual currency.
A close similarity in the States would be the issue facing many fantasy sports companies when it comes to the segregation of player funds & operating funds as a result of legislation building on the principles of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act.
Do note that this stems from scummy companies who have cheated customers AND companies who have dealt with chargebacks via cards customers used for purchases.
Additionally, we've seen that Rockstar's anti-cheat methods & other protocols like dupe detection have been suspect at best, so it's a bit to ask that much of their underlying code gets reworked when we've seen how core launch elements (armored trucks) get scrapped for bigger picture ideas.
As someone who works in the industry, I'd love to hear some further discussion, but I'd sooner like to see a re-imagining of the casino to feature what the community would truly play- there's no need for wagering, let us run it like a business or use it for a heist.
TL;DR: The creation of an operational GTAO casino location that would function as a place for betting has much to figure out from a legal landscape & would best be reworked as a heist location or a business.

The NRA's magazine has had a page they titled "Armed Citizen" that appears to have been in the magazine from the beginning. Each month they post a highly edited news bite they found on some newspaper site recounting where an "Armed Citizen" had defended their person, family, bystanders or business with a firearm. Quite often it involves discharging their firearm resulting in the injury or death of someone suspected of acting illegally to threaten them or others. The articles leave out many, many details contained in the original news article. The version they post in the NRA's "Armed Citizen" usually give a false impression of the vile and dangerous nature of the "assailant" that is deal with by the "Armed Citizen" with their firearm. They also skirt over legal issues calling into question the legality of the actions of the "Armed Citizen" with in using their firearm in the incident.
So, I posted some of the information from original news articles they posted under "Armed Citizen" in heavily edited form. The information the American Rifleman column leaves out. What I got for my effort was initial replies followed the next morning by being banned from the nra subreddit.
Below are my postings revealing the fraudulent nature of the "Armed Citizen" articles in the American Rifleman web site and on page 10 of the magazine of the same name.

The Armed Citizen® January 4, 2019 Not much of a 'news week' ?
This installment of Armed Citizen features a duplicate of the same article posted for February 25, 2019. I guess NR couldn't find any reason to have a gun during the February 25, 2019 period so they just copied and pasted this one into it.
The Armed Citizen® January 7, 2019 Ah, those little details
The incident cited tells of a family 'matriarch' defending her family from a "51 year old trespasser" who'd pointed a gun at them.
The local news article however paints a slightly different picture than the "trespasser" walking up the the "matriarch" and pointing a gun at her and her children.
The news account has her son discovering the "trespasser" (who only seems to have trespassed into the "matriarch's" truck cab, pointing a gun with no round in the chamber (didn't say if his gun was double or single action) in response to the "matriarch" pointing her 38 revolver at him. The "trespasser" then backed away, keeping his gun trained on the "matriarch" but firing no shots. The only shots fired were fired by the "matriarch". The first (allegedly) as warning. "Then fired two more shots at Ryder as he walked west, away from them." Police then arrived and took the "trespasser" into custody.
Just interesting the picture of "the trespasser" charging up to the plucky "matriarch" and her clutch of youngins waving a gun as opposed to him being discovered having gained entry into the "matriarch's" truck for reasons not divulged by the article.
The Armed Citizen® January 11, 2019 - Get off my driveway
The incident involved a man attempting to break through a house's garage door. I don't suppose it's been established whether the man intended to continue from the garage into the house or just take items from the garage. But NR says "broke into the home through the garage" which is not born out by news articles of the incident. The article stetes that “The homeowner fired at least one round in the direction of the person who was breaking into his house.” and that the Armed Citizen "“The homeowner fired at least one round in the direction of the person who was breaking into his house.”
NR chooses to leave out critical details so that the impression is left that a man broke into a home and was shot by the Armed Citizen inside the home when news articles at the time tell a quite different story and there is still a chance that the Armed Citizen in this case may be held legally responsible for unlawfully shooting and killing a man in his driveway he says was trying to break into his garage.
The Armed Citizen® January 14, 2019 - Dog gone
The incident cited is of a hot burglary foiled by an Armed Citizen couple who opened fire on the (apparently unarmed) robbers, hitting one, sending him to a hospital. What the NR article does not mention however is that the Armed Citizen couple's small terrier dog named Rezz died in the crossfire. It is the depth of journalistic irresponsibility to omit this tragic loss from NR's heavily edited version of this story. Out hopes and prayers go out to this little canine angel. May little Rezz roam and frolic among the clouded hills of doggo heaven until being reunited with the masters who loved him or her so much on earth. Unless it was one of the masters who shot little Rezz dead. Then Rezz will likely prefer to roam with packs of feral canines attacking Armed Citizens and seizing their firearms and burying them so they'll never be found and used to kill again.
I urge you to have a good look at these two brazen ruffians and consider why they would break into the house of two 20-somethings, both packing heat in the sack. Just sayin.
The Armed Citizen® February 11, 2019 - 'Remember to drag 'em inside the house
The incident involved an Armed Citizen in Yuma County AZ shooting three apparently unarmed women and man entering or attempting to enter (depending on who you believe) to enter his house. One of the women shot died.
Two articles said the burglars were shot "as they entered". [Another]("The Yuma County Sheriff's Office says people inside the home were awakened by noised outside of people trying to get inside) said "The Yuma County Sheriff's Office says people inside the home were awakened by noised outside of people trying to get inside."
Once again, the suspects were not getting much sympathy from the person whose house was being broken into or the police, who likely knew the (probably drug addicts; vagrants) burglars. And I can recall many times hearing the advice to Armed Citizens that 'if you find someone entering your house or in your house and shoot them, be sure to drag them inside the house or you'll be charged with unlawful homicide. NR simply accepts their Armed Citizen's advice as do many pro NRA web sites that cite this incident as yet more proof every law abiding citizen needs a gun.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
I have heard someone trying to enter my home. I just stayed in bed and yelled and heard them scampering away. It seems unlikely a man would bring three women to stack a home unless he thought the house was unoccupied. Or maybe he planned to let the women enter first and take the bullets while he high-tailed it. This would seem a believable scenario for a pack of meth-heads looking for something to pawn for their next fix, not some diabolical home invasion attack. I have to believe that if the burglars were in any way armed, it would be in the police report and NR would have made light of it.
The NRA's magazine has had a page they titled "Armed Citizen" that appears to have been in the magazine from the beginning. Each month they post a highly edited news bite they found on some newspaper site recounting where an "Armed Citizen" had defended their person, family, bystanders or business with a firearm. Quite often it involves discharging their firearm resulting in the injury or death of someone suspected of acting illegally to threaten them or others. The articles leave out many, many details contained in the original news article. The version they post in the NRA's "Armed Citizen" usually give a false impression of the vile and dangerous nature of the "assailant" that is deal with by the "Armed Citizen" with their firearm. They also skirt over legal issues calling into question the legality of the actions of the "Armed Citizen" with in using their firearm in the incident.
So, I posted some of the information from original news articles they posted under "Armed Citizen" in heavily edited form. The information the American Rifleman column leaves out. What I got for my effort was initial replies followed the next morning by being banned from the nra subreddit.
Below are my postings revealing the fraudulent nature of the "Armed Citizen" articles in the American Rifleman web site and on page 10 of the magazine of the same name.

The Armed Citizen® January 4, 2019 Not much of a 'news week' ?
This installment of Armed Citizen features a duplicate of the same article posted for February 25, 2019. I guess NR couldn't find any reason to have a gun during the February 25, 2019 period so they just copied and pasted this one into it.
The Armed Citizen® January 7, 2019 Ah, those little details
The incident cited tells of a family 'matriarch' defending her family from a "51 year old trespasser" who'd pointed a gun at them.
The local news article however paints a slightly different picture than the "trespasser" walking up the the "matriarch" and pointing a gun at her and her children.
The news account has her son discovering the "trespasser" (who only seems to have trespassed into the "matriarch's" truck cab, pointing a gun with no round in the chamber (didn't say if his gun was double or single action) in response to the "matriarch" pointing her 38 revolver at him. The "trespasser" then backed away, keeping his gun trained on the "matriarch" but firing no shots. The only shots fired were fired by the "matriarch". The first (allegedly) as warning. "Then fired two more shots at Ryder as he walked west, away from them." Police then arrived and took the "trespasser" into custody.
Just interesting the picture of "the trespasser" charging up to the plucky "matriarch" and her clutch of youngins waving a gun as opposed to him being discovered having gained entry into the "matriarch's" truck for reasons not divulged by the article.
The Armed Citizen® January 11, 2019 - Get off my driveway
The incident involved a man attempting to break through a house's garage door. I don't suppose it's been established whether the man intended to continue from the garage into the house or just take items from the garage. But NR says "broke into the home through the garage" which is not born out by news articles of the incident. The article states that “The homeowner fired at least one round in the direction of the person who was breaking into his house.” and that the Armed Citizen "“The homeowner fired at least one round in the direction of the person who was breaking into his house.”
NR chooses to leave out critical details so that the impression is left that a man broke into a home and was shot by the Armed Citizen inside the home when news articles at the time tell a quite different story and there is still a chance that the Armed Citizen in this case may be held legally responsible for unlawfully shooting and killing a man in his driveway he says was trying to break into his garage.
The Armed Citizen® January 14, 2019 - Dog gone
The incident cited is of a hot burglary foiled by an Armed Citizen couple who opened fire on the (apparently unarmed) robbers, hitting one, sending him to a hospital. What the NR article does not mention however is that the Armed Citizen couple's small terrier dog named Rezz died in the crossfire. It is the depth of journalistic irresponsibility to omit this tragic loss from NR's heavily edited version of this story. Out hopes and prayers go out to this little canine angel. May little Rezz roam and frolic among the clouded hills of doggo heaven until being reunited with the masters who loved him or her so much on earth. Unless it was one of the masters who shot little Rezz dead. Then Rezz will likely prefer to roam with packs of feral canines attacking Armed Citizens and seizing their firearms and burying them so they'll never be found and used to kill again.
I urge you to have a good look at these two brazen ruffians and consider why they would break into the house of two 20-somethings, both packing heat in the sack. Just sayin.
The Armed Citizen® February 11, 2019 - 'Remember to drag 'em inside the house
The incident involved an Armed Citizen in Yuma County AZ shooting three apparently unarmed women and man entering or attempting to enter (depending on who you believe) to enter his house. One of the women shot died.
Two articles said the burglars were shot "as they entered". [Another]("The Yuma County Sheriff's Office says people inside the home were awakened by noised outside of people trying to get inside) said "The Yuma County Sheriff's Office says people inside the home were awakened by noised outside of people trying to get inside."
Once again, the suspects were not getting much sympathy from the person whose house was being broken into or the police, who likely knew the (probably drug addicts; vagrants) burglars. And I can recall many times hearing the advice to Armed Citizens that 'if you find someone entering your house or in your house and shoot them, be sure to drag them inside the house or you'll be charged with unlawful homicide. NR simply accepts their Armed Citizen's advice as do many pro NRA web sites that cite this incident as yet more proof every law abiding citizen needs a gun.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
I have heard someone trying to enter my home. I just stayed in bed and yelled and heard them scampering away. It seems unlikely a man would bring three women to stack a home unless he thought the house was unoccupied. Or maybe he planned to let the women enter first and take the bullets while he high-tailed it. This would seem a believable scenario for a pack of meth-heads looking for something to pawn for their next fix, not some diabolical home invasion attack. I have to believe that if the burglars were in any way armed, it would be in the police report and NR would have made light of it:

The Armed Citizen® January 18, 2019 - Blind Justice
The incident tells of a robbery at an internet 'game room' (gambling) in Jacksonville, Fla., where a man attempting to rob the business sprayed pepper spray into the face of the security guard. The guard then shot the assailant. What NR fails to mention is that the guard was blinded by the spray and was only able to shoot at the escaping (also not mentioned) robber with one of the business's patrons "steer the armed security guard in the suspect's direction." (and the aim of his gun I would assume) towards the door where the failed robber had just exited the business from. NR fails to mention the robber was fleeing and that the security guard's gun was all but aimed by someone other than himself, or that he was just spraying bullets in the general direction his aiming aid had pointed him in. Either way, the guard took lives other than the robber into his hands by firing at a point that his personal safety was no longer threatened since the robber was running out the door.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
The robber does not seem to have produced a gun. It's therefore not unreasonable to suspect he planned on wrestling the security guard's gun from him to complete the robbery. A robber can't point pepper spray and say "put the money in the bag or I'll spray". It just won't work. So it appears the guard did the right thing by holding onto his gun. But his blind spray-and-pray response was non justified by the time the assailant had exited the building.
The Armed Citizen® January 21, 2019 - Drinking till dawn
The cited incident involved an Armed Citizen shooting one of his two sons to to save the other who the first son was holding in a headlock and holding a knife over. My first impression is, what kind of Armed Citizen lets a machete wielding son force them to take refuge in a room. Local news article.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
How about calling the police at that point instead of cowering as their two sons consumed alcohol until 6 A.M. ? Chances are, if they had called 911 when the machete play started, the police could have disarmed and taken into custody of the older brother and gotten him psychological care after drying out the day after.
And if a gun had to come into play, couldn't the Armed Citizen maybe shot the arm holding the knife, then the one administering the choke-hold instead of lethal strikes? Maybe the father was too drunk to shoot straight. A heartbreaking story.
The Armed Citizen® March 1, 2019 - Not exactly Michael Myers
The cited incident cites a man receiving superficial stab woulds to his elbow by an attacker on Halloween evening whereupon the victim's brother cousin exited his car and was subsequently stabbed as well in his elbow. The cousin then drew and fired a firearm, killing the knife attacker.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
The coverage does not mention any warning issued to the knife wielding man prior to opening fire on him. The first victim received a single (non life-threatening) stab to his elbow. Not exactly a death blow. There is no mention of any follow-up stabs. This seems like an opportunity for a warning. The cousin seems like he might have been taken by surprise from the description. If he'd seen his cousin getting stabbed, it seems like he would have had his gun drawn by the time he'd stepped out of the car and so could have fired or warned before being stabbed himself.
Of course this is Monday quarterbacking. But it's significant the details NR leaves out of these Armed Citizen accounts. Most readers probably envision Michael Myers trapsing along among trick-or-treaters searching for some throats to slash. I don't know the motivation the attacker had. But if it was killing, he was obviously either incompetent or half-hearted in his efforts. For that matter, no mention is made of the blade size. I know. Any knife can deal a deadly cut. But not when the blade is directed at elbows and biceps.
Yes, the Armed Citizen was in his rights to draw and fire his firearm in the scenario described. I'm just left wondering who's dumber. The idiot poking a knife or the Armed Citizen who walks right into him after seeing his cousin getting stabbed by him.
The Armed Citizen® February 22, 2019 Shootout at the golden arches
The article cites a shooting at a Birmingham, Ala McDonalds where a man is exiting the diner as the last customer. As he was exiting, an armed man wearing a mask burst into the McDonalds, apparently forcing the man back inside (though the citation does not say this) the building. The citation says the gunman "firing at everyone inside". The impression may be of an intentional mass shooting when it seems more likely the gunman was intent upon robbing the McDonalds at the end of the day and before all their cash had been locked in their safe. The man exiting only became involved because the manager had used his key to open the door and would lock it back up after the man and his sons had exited.
The citations states "The attacker’s gunfire hit the armed citizen and one of his sons before he pulled his own concealed firearm and shot back". This only makes sense to me if the "Armed Citizen" made moves towards his gun. He has of course, every right, under the circumstances, to do so. However, with two sons and McDonalds staff around him, he may be risking their lives by engaging the robber with his gun. Things likely happened fast and whether the Armed Citizen reached for his gun before the gunman opened ire may or may not have been determinable by eyewitnesses or store surveillance video. After that bullets were sprayed by both gunmen and the gunman was killed and the Armed Citizen and his sun were hit. Fortunately both survived.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Armed robbery is very common these days. I've heard people in big cities like NYC and LA say they and most of their friends have been robbed at gunpoint. They mostly just don't make sudden moves and slowly hand the robber their wallet. It's a pain in the ass, no one usually gets shot.
The robber was identified as having previously been charged with "possession of marijuana and carrying a pistol without a license" and had had his probation revoked. He apparently had no homicide convictions.
It's likely neither the police nor the McDonalds staff have any sympathy for the gunman and it's entirely possible this may have affected any action taken by the Armed Citizen that may have triggered the gunman to begin shooting.
The Armed Citizen® January 28, 2019 - Missed by that much
The incident involves a Walgreen employee who drew his legally carried firearm during a armed holdup at the store he was working at, killing the robber. OK. But the NR's casual mention that a bystander was "grazed in the shooting" is disturbing. Grazed often means - a few inches this way or that and the you have a dead bystander. It's obviously an out-of-control shot so it could have landed anywhere. Isn't it interesting NR reduces the number of "grazed bystanders" from two to one and fails to mention that both were hit by the Armed Citizen.
In fact Three people were shot — one fatally — by a south Tulsa Walgreens employee. So this Oklahoma Walgreens cowboy put three lives in danger. More luck than skill that only the robber received the killing shot.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Time after time it seems when an Armed Citizen pulls a firearm in the middle of a crime in progress by a gun wielding perpetrator results in a 'bystander' getting shot - either by the Armed Citizen or the perp. Either way, Armed Citizens don't seem very good at weighting the risks to others to their gunslinging show-boating.
The Armed Citizen® February 25, 2019 - Jim Dandy and his gun to the rescue
The incident cites a domestic disturbance that is taken into a parking lot where a man sees a neighbor kicking a woman and her 10 year old daughter. It does not mention whether the witness dialed 911. Neither does it say whether the kicking was moderate ass-kicking or if the victim(s) were on the ground being kicked in the head. The neighbor grabs a gun and runs to the parking lot, confronts the kicker while the woman and her daughter run off. The armed neighbor says the kicker charged him, ignoring warnings to halt. The armed neighbor shoots the kicker several times - killing him.
The article cited in the Clarkesville News and Tribune (not Daily News) says that "a domestic dispute started in an apartment" indicating the assailant was known to the victim, not someone showing up at her door. No mention is made of the relationship between the woman victim and the assailant. The woman her daughter were treated at a local hospital for 'minor injuries' and released. This too was omitted from the NRA citation.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Police are expert at handling domestic disputes. They are a large part of their responsibility as law enforcement officers. I've heard they can be very dangerous for all involved and they have tactics and training to quell them without resorting to deadly force.
If the armed citizen had taken his cell phone instead instead (or along with ) his holstered gun and dialed 911, following the three involved to guide police to the location, the life of someone the article refers to simply as "the assailant" may have been spared. We know little of this person other than he is now dead.
The Armed Citizen® January 21, 2019 - Drinking till dawn
The incident tells of a robbery at an internet 'game room' (gambling) in Jacksonville, Fla., where a man attempting to rob the business sprayed pepper spray into the face of the security guard. The guard then shot the assailant. What NR fails to mention is that the guard was blinded by the spray and was only able to shoot at the escaping (also not mentioned) robber with one of the business's patrons "steer the armed security guard in the suspect's direction." (and the aim of his gun I would assume) towards the door where the failed robber had just exited the business from. NR fails to mention the robber was fleeing and that the security guard's gun was all but aimed by someone other than himself, or that he was just spraying bullets in the general direction his aiming aid had pointed him in. Either way, the guard took lives other than the robber into his hands by firing at a point that his personal safety was no longer threatened since the robber was running out the door.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
The robber does not seem to have produced a gun. It's therefore not unreasonable to suspect he planned on wrestling the security guard's gun from him to complete the robbery. A robber can't point pepper spray and say "put the money in the bag or I'll spray". It just won't work. So it appears the guard did the right thing by holding onto his gun. But his blind spray-and-pray response was non justified by the time the assailant had exited the building.
The Armed Citizen® January 18, 2019 - Blind Justice
The cited incident involved an Armed Citizen shooting one of his two sons to to save the other who the first son was holding in a headlock and holding a knife over. My first impression is, what kind of Armed Citizen lets a machete wielding son force them to take refuge in a room.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
How about calling the police at that point instead of cowering as their two sons consumed alcohol until 6 A.M. ? Chances are, if they had called 911 when the machete play started, the police could have disarmed and taken into custody of the older brother and gotten him psychological care after drying out the day after.
And if a gun had to come into play, couldn't the Armed Citizen maybe shot the arm holding the knife, then the one administering the choke-hold instead of lethal strikes? Maybe the father was too drunk to shoot straight. A heartbreaking story.
The Armed Citizen® March 1, 2019 - Not exactly Michael Myers
The cited incident cites a man receiving superficial stab woulds to his elbow by an attacker on Halloween evening whereupon the victim's brother cousin exited his car and was subsequently stabbed as well in his elbow. The cousin then drew and fired a firearm, killing the knife attacker.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
The coverage does not mention any warning issued to the knife wielding man prior to opening fire on him. The first victim received a single (non life-threatening) stab to his elbow. Not exactly a death blow. There is no mention of any follow-up stabs. This seems like an opportunity for a warning. The cousin seems like he might have been taken by surprise from the description. If he'd seen his cousin getting stabbed, it seems like he would have had his gun drawn by the time he'd stepped out of the car and so could have fired or warned before being stabbed himself.
Of course this is Monday quarterbacking. But it's significant the details NR leaves out of these Armed Citizen accounts. Most readers probably envision Michael Myers trapsing along among trick-or-treaters searching for some throats to slash. I don't know the motivation the attacker had. But if it was killing, he was obviously either incompetent or half-hearted in his efforts. For that matter, no mention is made of the blade size. I know. Any knife can deal a deadly cut. But not when the blade is directed at elbows and biceps.
Yes, the Armed Citizen was in his rights to draw and fire his firearm in the scenario described. I'm just left wondering who's dumber. The idiot poking a knife or the Armed Citizen who walks right into him after seeing his cousin getting stabbed by him.
The Armed Citizen® February 22, 2019 Shootout at the golden arches
The article cites a shooting at a Birmingham, Ala McDonalds where a man is exiting the diner as the last customer. As he was exiting, an armed man wearing a mask burst into the McDonalds, apparently forcing the man back inside (though the citation does not say this) the building. The citation says the gunman "firing at everyone inside". The impression may be of an intentional mass shooting when it seems more likely the gunman was intent upon robbing the McDonalds at the end of the day and before all their cash had been locked in their safe. The man exiting only became involved because the manager had used his key to open the door and would lock it back up after the man and his sons had exited.
The citations states "The attacker’s gunfire hit the armed citizen and one of his sons before he pulled his own concealed firearm and shot back". This only makes sense to me if the "Armed Citizen" made moves towards his gun. He has of course, every right, under the circumstances, to do so. However, with two sons and McDonalds staff around him, he may be risking their lives by engaging the robber with his gun. Things likely happened fast and whether the Armed Citizen reached for his gun before the gunman opened ire may or may not have been determinable by eyewitnesses or store surveillance video. After that bullets were sprayed by both gunmen and the gunman was killed and the Armed Citizen and his sun were hit. Fortunately both survived.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Armed robbery is very common these days. I've heard people in big cities like NYC and LA say they and most of their friends have been robbed at gunpoint. They mostly just don't make sudden moves and slowly hand the robber their wallet. It's a pain in the ass, no one usually gets shot.
The robber was identified as having previously been charged with "possession of marijuana and carrying a pistol without a license" and had had his probation revoked. He apparently had no homicide convictions.
It's likely neither the police nor the McDonalds staff have any sympathy for the gunman and it's entirely possible this may have affected any action taken by the Armed Citizen that may have triggered the gunman to begin shooting.
The Armed Citizen® January 28, 2019 - Missed by that much
The incident involves a Walgreen employee who drew his legally carried firearm during a armed holdup at the store he was working at, killing the robber. OK. But the NR's casual mention that a bystander was "grazed in the shooting" is disturbing. Grazed often means - a few inches this way or that and the you have a dead bystander. It's obviously an out-of-control shot so it could have landed anywhere. Isn't it interesting NR reduces the number of "grazed bystanders" from two to one and fails to mention that both were hit by the Armed Citizen.
In fact Three people were shot — one fatally — by a south Tulsa Walgreens employee. So this Oklahoma Walgreens cowboy put three lives in danger. More luck than skill that only the robber received the killing shot.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Time after time it seems when an Armed Citizen pulls a firearm in the middle of a crime in progress by a gun wielding perpetrator results in a 'bystander' getting shot - either by the Armed Citizen or the perp. Either way, Armed Citizens don't seem very good at weighting the risks to others to their gunslinging show-boating.
The Armed Citizen® February 25, 2019 - Jim Dandy and his gun to the rescue
The incident cites a domestic disturbance that is taken into a parking lot where a man sees a neighbor kicking a woman and her 10 year old daughter. It does not mention whether the witness dialed 911. Neither does it say whether the kicking was moderate ass-kicking or if the victim(s) were on the ground being kicked in the head. The neighbor grabs a gun and runs to the parking lot, confronts the kicker while the woman and her daughter run off. The armed neighbor says the kicker charged him, ignoring warnings to halt. The armed neighbor shoots the kicker several times - killing him.
The article cited in the Clarkesville News and Tribune (not Daily News) says that "a domestic dispute started in an apartment" indicating the assailant was known to the victim, not someone showing up at her door. No mention is made of the relationship between the woman victim and the assailant. The woman her daughter were treated at a local hospital for 'minor injuries' and released. This too was omitted from the NRA citation.
I just have to wonder if this could have been handled in a way where no loss of life would take place
Police are expert at handling domestic disputes. They are a large part of their responsibility as law enforcement officers. I've heard they can be very dangerous for all involved and they have tactics and training to quell them without resorting to deadly force.
If the armed citizen had taken his cell phone instead instead (or along with ) his holstered gun and dialed 911, following the three involved to guide police to the location, the life of someone the article refers to simply as "the assailant" may have been spared. We know little of this person other than he is now dead.

Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act | Certified

what is the unlawful internet gambling enforcement act

what is the unlawful internet gambling enforcement act - win

Casino Verification Onka

Why Sell?

Online Gambling World As Players See It

Regulation and Crypto - How do we move forward?

Online Poker

P2P File Sharing vs DEXs

The Resistance

The Future

Quick and fast approvals with Online Gaming Merchant Account

Why sell?

Why Sell?

Free Slots Games as well as Being Familiar With Online Casino Sites

Attraction of Online Casino Games

I was encouraged to post this here, looking for thoughts/feedback

Gambling laws in the UK on the internet

Gun Control Conversation. I am against it for the most part but even my against causes issues with others against it. In my opinion the issue has less to do with guns and more to do with people.

Destination of Online Casino Gamings

How Online Gambling is Seen in the World

Online Gambling World As Players See It

The Possibilities of a GTAO Casino

Issue 1: GTAO is Global

Issue 2: Player Funds- Purchase vs. Earned

The "Armed Citizen" column in the NRA's American Rifleman Magazine (print and online versions) is fake news propaganda.

what is the unlawful internet gambling enforcement act video

what is the unlawful internet gambling enforcement act top

Scammers Go Mad While Losing $3,000 In Gift Cards - YouTube