Privacy settings

We use a number of cookies on our website. Some are essential, while others help us improve our portal for you.

Privacy settings

Here is an overview of all the cookies we use. You can choose to accept whole categories or view more information and select only certain cookies.

Essential (6)

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.

Statistics (3)

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
If the statistics cookies are subsequently deselected, they will remain on the computer until the expiry date. However, they are neither updated nor evaluated.

Online Casinos in general: 15.10.2020 - Casino Deadline Day? All over? (Page 7)

Topic created on 23rd Sep. 2020 | Page: 7 of 108 | Answers: 1,070 | Views: 295,389
Jojuaax3
Rookie
Have now read through... and am shocked how all cry because of the 1000 € limit around
I now assume something and say that you do not all earn 4-5k net to be able to afford 1k + to gamble. 🤷♂️

But hey, maybe gambling is more important to you than anything else in life
But just then the limit is not the worst. 😉

This post has been translated automatically

Katharina2
Top Member
Jojuaax3 wrote on 29.09.2020 at 08:18 clock: Have me now times read through... and am shocked how all cry because of the 1000€ limit around
I now assume something and say that you do not all earn 4-5k net to be able to afford 1k+ to gamble. 🤷♂️

But hey, maybe gambling is more important to you than anything else in life
But just then the limit is not the worst thing 😉

There is no one crying around. The focus was on the money statement of 1000 € on the
Difference in Player protection between Austria and Germany.

Maybe it is more understandable now.

This post has been translated automatically

M****8

Katharina2 wrote on 09/29/2020 at 09:38 AM
There is no one crying around. The focus was on the money statement of 1000 € on the
Difference of the Player protection between Austria and Germany.

Maybe it is more understandable now.

let the poor degro in peace with Ihmchen I already had my fun I guess but as I said I guess times the colleague is a Privatinsolvenzler the highest grade will be happy when all this is finally over, but he forgets one thing that is still a hobby!

If someone can afford it but really can afford! Then he should also be allowed to spend 3000 euros a month and the low budget gambler (which I'm also in between you do not always need to exaggerate) who can not cope with your money so or so, or want to strive for this hobby as a money earning side income the should get urgent very urgent help!

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
Jojuaax3 wrote on 29.09.2020 at 08:18 clock: Have me now times read through... and am shocked how all cry because of the 1000€ limit around
I now assume something and say that you do not all earn 4-5k net to be able to afford 1k+ to gamble. 🤷♂️

But hey, maybe gambling is more important to you than anything else in life
But just then, the limit is not the worst thing 😉

Of course you're not wrong, some will not even affect this limit to 1000€, however, me to some extent.
Nevertheless, I'm not directly about the amount as such, but about the fact that on the one hand father state once again interferes in my private life and wants to dictate to me what I have to do and leave and on the other hand, I have no 30min away from me a large casino where I could gamble without problems as much money as I am funny. This is absolutely stupid, to set limits online, to raise the finger admonishingly, to want to strengthen Player protection, but in the casino I could gamble away unlimited house and yard. The state wants to earn money from online gambling, so be it, no problem. It is not the worst thing for us players if the casinos would be under German legislation. But these limitations, not only the financial, the omission of autostart, delayed spins etc. that is in my opinion bullshit. Especially when you consider that I could still gamble away house and yard around the corner

This post has been translated automatically

M****8

Matthlign wrote on 29.09.2020 at 11:26 am
Of course you are not wrong, some will not even affect this limitation to 1000€, me however partly already.
Nevertheless, I am not directly concerned with the amount as such, but with the fact that on the one hand father state once again interferes in my private life and wants to dictate to me what I have to do and not do, and on the other hand that I have a large casino not 30min away from me, where I could gamble as much money as I am funny without any problems. This is absolutely stupid, to set limits online, to raise the finger admonishingly, to want to strengthen Player protection, but in the casino I could gamble away unlimited house and yard. The state wants to earn money from online gambling, so be it, no problem. It is not the worst thing for us players if the casinos would be under German legislation. But these limitations, not only the financial, the omission of autostart, delayed spins etc. that is in my opinion bullshit. Especially when you consider that I could still gamble away house and yard around the corner.

Ditto!!!


I was once with 3 of my buddies at the Düsseldorf casino the one or knows the store certainly. Now guess how much we have left there at that time. I say so you could get with the money an above average used car that is a few years old.
It didn't hurt us, but despite that you think someone came up to us and said that we should leave or stop (wouldn't have done it anyway but that's not the point). But that's just typical German no matter in what area it is you are asked by the father state to adhere to this this shelf, but which bring with them thousands of contradictions and gaps.

This post has been translated automatically

mowolum
Elite
Sometimes a feeling of not understanding creeps up on me.
God and all the world complains constantly, the state interferes.
Why it is good so one sees at Corona, everyone sees it, everyone knows it, but the fewest understand it.
Unfortunately, and I repeat, unfortunately, the state must and will then interfere.

If I am a danger to myself and others, an institution of our state will always intervene.

To the chagrin of those who have understood everything and carry it out.

It is the same with gambling.
Why do we complain, we have it ourselves to ascribe.Is not only, I endanger myself, speak addiction, Debt, etc, but also others, speak family, friends, creditors, etc..
Entitles the state to intervene.
What is of course in the focus are the additional tax revenues.

And so everyone has just his, what he wants to say about it, whether useful or not.Lies in the discretion of each himself, to what extent the understanding is present.

This post has been translated automatically

d****o
Catherine2 wrote on 09/29/2020 at 08:11
@degro
Thank you first of all for your effort of contribution. So we can clarify the matter
better clear it up.

I don't spread half-knowledge and just call things as they are and function
them either.

What you call here is a legal decision of the 'Landesverwaltungsgericht Wien' from
27.04.2016, case number: VGW-002/059/7266/2015 and concerns Austria, not
Germany.

I know that one and I know that too, only every case is different and for Germany
at present the Brussels decision is waited, whether the EuGH still effectively
is another question. At least one cannot equate the above-mentioned legal decision at present
with Germany, as there is no case law of the ECJ. That the
possibility exists that the same decision will be made for Germany also remains to be seen.
We must also see that Player protection in Austria is a real protection
is and D only with money and 1000 €, with proof of income to 30 000 €, in the
race.

From therefore I remain with my statements that D not with EU laws among other things with
of freedom of service and freedom of establishment. That is not the only thing.
Why this is so, about it the legal commentary to the futuregives information
GlüStV 2021 the lawyer Dr. Nik Sarafi. Do not know whether may be linked, but under
ISA Guide...... ISA LAW....The new State Treaty on Gambling - Quo vadis ? get
interested insight into legal security, which is otherwise gladly concealed.

Copy-degro:
I don't know who started this bullshit with the service-
freedom, and thus gray zone or
even legality of gambling to spread! Even
the ECJ is on the side of Germany!
Thus one is zero protected if a casino does not pay out, and has no chance.
Also the win can be confiscated accordingly.
That the state does not punish that, is because of the millionfold criminal charges, which are simply
not to be mastered.
The fear of the ECJ is it definitely not, even if that some would like to have in such a way
would like to have, or represent.

Germany has joined the EU. We are all Europeans. Casinos have European
license. EU law takes precedence over national law. Germany must align its GlüStV with EU law
according to EU law. So far, this has not been the case. Whether everything is OK with the future GlüStV 2021,
the EU must decide, or else the ECJ will decide, as in the example of Vienna
Germany is in this gray area, not the player as a European, the fol-
correctly on a Casino. com - side goes. They know that and keep quiet. And that the
State does not punish is because they themselves violate EU laws and have no chance of success
on success have. The improvement is now with the GlüStV 2021 in Brussels before and
must simply be waited for

Germany and Austria have an identical legal system


Have you ever asked yourself why casinos don't take a complaint about the freedom to provide services all the way to the
ECJ? They would have the money, but no chance of success
Or do you know a casino that has sued?
That alone should make you think.

Again, the Tip to read the judgment of the ECJ completely, there is nothing else.
Even specialist lawyers of people who wanted to sue get the same answer.
I do not write more in addition.

@Metallica_88

I don't communicate with people who have a hidden Heil Hi..... in their nick anyway.
To explain something to right-wing radicals, does not bring so much, therefore understand here also nothing.

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
mowolum wrote on 09/29/2020 at 11:51 am: Sometimes such a feeling of not understanding creeps up on me.
God and all the world complains all the time, the state interferes.
Why it is good so one sees at Corona .everybody sees it,everybody knows it,but the fewest understand it.
Unfortunately, and I repeat, unfortunately, the state must and will then interfere.

If I am a danger to myself and others, an institution of our state will always intervene.

To the chagrin of those who have understood everything and carry it out.

It is the same with gambling.
Why do we complain, we have it ourselves to ascribe.Is not only, I endanger myself, speak addiction, Debt, etc, but also others, speak family, friends, creditors, etc..
Entitles the state to intervene.
What is of course in the focus are the additional tax revenues.

And so everyone has just his, what he wants to say about it, whether useful or not.Lies in the discretion of each himself, to what extent the understanding is present.

The intervening of the state in relation to the Corona pandemic, with the intervention of the state in relation to gambling to compare is already very far out the window
Apples and oranges

-> "If I am a danger to myself and others, an institution of our state will always intervene."

No and I refer only to gambling, not that we misunderstand each other, but if your statement were true, casinos would also have to be limited.
But that's not the case and please, whoever comes up with the argument that there are people who supervise and address problem gamblers and block them, has never or rarely seen a casino from the inside. That doesn't mean that it doesn't happen from time to time, but as a rule you can gamble away your house and yard

"It's not just me who's endangering myself..."

Please, then the state would have to regulate much more
An alcoholic often endangers not only himself and his actions often affect family, friends, the entire environment. But does the state intervene? No. As soon as you are of age, it doesn't matter to him if you have an alcohol problem and it harms you and your environment, Father State still doesn't forbid you to buy unlimited alcohol and doesn't intervene there

The whole thing has nothing to do with "not wanting to understand or not being able to understand". There must be laws in this country, there are moments or situations where the state must intervene, yes. However, we also have rights and in my opinion it goes too far that father state now interferes in this case in my private life. It should be my right to do what I want with the money I earn with my own hands, legally, for which I pay taxes

Here the "player protection" is taken as a pretext to legalize the casinos to generate tax money

However, I respect your opinion and if you think it's all good and legal, please, no problem
However, telling me and others "we wouldn't understand" is a bad joke, as your argumentations are absolutely baseless



This post has been translated automatically

mowolum
Elite
everyone puts on the shoe that fits

Of course, the state also intervenes in alcoholism, if I am or become a danger to me and others.
Just as with other diseases, just think of dementia.The state must only be informed about it.Be it from neighbors, or, or.
I do not see that as an encroachment on my personal rights, because then I am incapable of acting, in the sense of our society
Why should casinos etc. not be regulated.
But this is something that I think, and this is just my opinion, will not be possible.
So there will always be differences, see smoking, alcoholism and 1000 others.
It will probably also with this whole set of rules of gambling, as with many things, become the never-ending story.

This post has been translated automatically

d****o
@Katharina2

By the way, why can you buy weed in Holland and not in Germany? Does the freedom to provide services
not count?
It's exactly the same. Addiction/drug protection takes precedence over the legalization of weed.

And it's the same with OC. Player/addiction protection goes before freedom of services.
And even if you say now, you can't compare that: Yes, you can compare it even very well
because it is absolutely identical. Only the reasons are somewhat different
With the one one sees the entrance drug, with the other one the addiction danger incl. downward whirlpool!

And both trumps the freedom of services!

A certain sovereignty is entitled even the ECJ the different countries!
And as long as first the BGH is responsible.
Who likes, can complain gladly up to the EuGH through. There is no other possibility.

This post has been translated automatically

Hot Topics10th May. 2024 at 12:16 am CEST

GambleJoe is aimed exclusively at user whose allowed to play legally with his current location in online casinos and does not violate the current law.
It is the responsibility of the user to inform himself about the current legal situation. Gambling is prohibited for children and adolescents under the age of 18.
GambleJoe is a registered trademark with the EUIPO of GJ International Ltd.

© 2012-2024 GambleJoe.com

Forgotten your password?

Create a new password here

  • 1. Fill in the 3 fields carefully and click on the green button
  • 2. Check your email inbox for a message from GambleJoe
  • 3. Click on the confirmation link in the email and your new password will be active immediately