Using a single fraudulent which happened in an unknown casino website to back up a claim that all casinos are fraudulent is the clear-cut form of absurdity. Commentators love picking out one or two incidents and making a generalization from it. In legislative hearings, the lobbyists calling for tougher regulations of the online casino market present a supposed victim to convince the legislators that the lack of regulation led to the wiping out of his assets. After the hearing of the so-called victim, the lobbyists will then make a conclusion convincing the legislators to pass law banning or at least regulating the online casinos. First of all, categorizing all online casinos into one category cannot logically happen because each casino business has its own unique characteristics. An online casino in one place or based in a distant county operates different from another. Casino A may have a different betting system than Casino B. In other words, no two online casinos are alike and it is preposterous to categorize all so-called online betting system into one group. Second, presenting a single victim or two victims for the purpose of convincing legislators to enact laws prohibiting or regulating online casinos is too absurd. Statistical reports are more convincing, but there are none to speak of. No solid statistical proof can establish any claim that online casinos are draining the properties of many people. If it is true that the casinos are fraudulent online money-leeching entities, then how can one explain the popularity of the online casino sites? Assuming that people are getting drained of their money, then how come people are still playing and the number of online casinos is still growing?