OK. I give up! I swore last time I wouldn't get into this discussion; it is too heated--too much danger of losing a friend. However, I have a suggestion and a comment to Mark's post. As some of you know, I'm a lawyer and can't resist a good fight.

Suggestion: I think this is a proper subject for an open discussion at the CC&GTCC annual meetings--as well as at the several local chapters. If I could ever get over to A.C. I would suggest a discussion to which I would invite a prosecutor who is knowledgeable on the law of New Jersey and one or more casino reps. I think the club could profit with a similar controlled discussion in Las Vegas.

First a general comment: Although theft will be defined by statute in each state [or by Congress for the feds], generally theft is the taking of property from another with the intention to permanently deprive that person of his right to ownership or possession. With that definition, [MARK, are you listening] when you buy in to a casino regular game and exchange your money for their checks of value, unless restricted by law or prohibited by the "contract" with the casino [and there are a few casinos--some Native American ones--that post signs forbidding the taking of their chips], you do not steal when you put them in your pocket. You have purchased them at value [usually to the delight of the casino since they are making a much greater profit per chip than if you put into play on their table]. But technically, for the reasons correctly stated by ARCHIE, when you buy into a roulette game, you are only getting the use of the chips--a bailment. To take them w/o casino permission technically constitutes a theft. Now, if the casino doesn't care or permits their removal, fine. But as we know, those colored chips without $ signs are sometimes worth a quarter, sometimes a half, sometimes a dollar or more, and a casino certainly doesn't want a customer buying a stack of quarter chips only to return later in the night and throw them into a $2 game.

Having stuck my nose into this thread where I'm probably not wanted, I'll probably get burned, but I end by notng that although for many years, except for obsolete roulettes or roulettes from closed casinos, I would not buy [and not try to take] current roulettes. Alas, I have recently joined the ones some call "thieves"--all of whom I regard with the highest esteem, and now have at least one current roulette from many casinos. My rationale is similar to ARCHIE--I am not taking to sell at a profit--just to collect. On the other hand, someone did have to take the roulettes to sell or I wouldn't own very many. So if the original taking is a theft--then my purchase from the "thief" is likewise a form of theft [possessing property knowing the same to have been "stolen" is a form of theft]. So folks, keep the discussion going--but let's get the heat out of it--some of the thread borders on flaming. ARCHIE'S and JOHN B's and other contributors have provided us with helpful comments or criticisms--let's keep helping.