Columnist Dean Juipe: Congress could target Internet

Dean Juipe

Tuesday, June 13, 2000 | 9:30 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or 259-4084.

Those of us who came of age in the late 1960s and early 1970s, which was a period of heightened individualism and self-expression, oftentimes find it difficult to endorse anything that violates a person's freedom of choice.

The general rule of thumb is easy to follow: As long as you're aware of the risks and not hurting anyone else, you, as an adult, should be entitled to do as you please.

It's idealism in its purest form.

That attitude sometimes flies in the face of legal realities, such as laws that mandate motorcycle riders wear helmets or require automobile riders to be strapped into seat belts. But it's an enviable philosophy nonetheless, even if its practicality is sometimes flawed.

This confession, of sorts, is the result of electing to support the desire of some U.S. congressmen to ban Internet sports gaming.

Actually, this position is a trade-off for the belief that Congress would be better served going after on-line gamblers than it would prohibiting Nevada's legalized sports books from accepting wagers.

Both items -- reining in the Internet and dealing Nevada casinos a smack in the chops -- have been and will continue to stay in the news as Congress rushes through its agenda before departing for its summer break.

It's as if Congress wants to do something to restrict gambling during this session, and, assuming that actually is the case, it could do more for the common good by concentrating on heretofore unregulated Internet activities than it could by eliminating sports wagering in the one state in the union that allows it.

As expressed here many times in previous dissertations, Congress has inched beyond its purview in its quest to abolish legalized sports betting.

But Internet gambling may be another matter and maybe does merit legislative attention, even at the risk of restricting an individual's right of choice.

Democratic senator Richard Bryan of Nevada is co-sponsoring a bill under consideration in the Senate that targets Internet gambling. The addictive nature of Internet lotteries and sports gambling is at the center of the bill's intent.

The difference between legally betting in Reno or Las Vegas on a sports event and placing a similar bet via the Internet is twofold: Internet gambling sites are offshore and, arguably, too accessible, and the person making the Internet wager may not actually be of legal age.

If a 16-year-old approaches a betting window in a Nevada sports book and wants to put $5 on the Lakers to win Wednesday's game with the Pacers, the person behind the counter will have the good sense to turn him away. But that same teenager can use a credit card to open an offshore account and can bet untold thousands on the same game.

Everything related to Internet legislation is being examined and will continue to be studied in the years ahead as governmental agencies come to grips with its expansive reality. Barring sports wagering over the Internet might be the first step in a positive direction.

But Congress should leave legalized wagering in Nevada alone. It should also discourage its members who are trying to attach that bill to more important ones that are certain to pass and which are essential to our everyday life.