Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,686
The filter kicked in but it's not too hard to figure out what lies in the gap between legal drugs and hard drugs.Or put it another way: where does gambling sit on a continuum from sugary foods, to alcohol, to tobacco, spamspamspam, cocaine, heroin etc.
I have never understood why.We completely ban heroin and such like. If an adult can choose to gamble why can't they choose to use heroin?
Do they hanker after a beer, watching all those ads? But I take your point.The ads need to be banned. They're everywhere and in your face.
My 2 eldest lads (both under 12 years of age) are bombarded with them every time they watch a match on TV. I listen to them talking and they're discussing the odds and how much money they could make.
It's gone way too far now and needs to be regulated
I never said it should be illegal, I did say it should be clamped down on, and by that I mean restricted. Perhaps raise the legal age for a bet to 21 might be a start, by then people might be a little more mature. All VIP and other schemes should also be banned. If we can ban promotions in supermarkets for baby formula, we can do the same for gambling@Peanuts. No way should the supply of gambling facilities, online or otherwise, be illegal. Furthermore IMHO if drinks companies can advertise and promote their product then so too should gambling companies be able to do so. But I do think there should be curbs on targeting the vulnerable minority.
Well, that must be a very dubious statistic. Children killing themselves not because they have lost money per se but because they took the hump at losing.I never said it should be illegal, I did say it should be clamped down on, and by that I mean restricted. Perhaps raise the legal age for a bet to 21 might be a start, by then people might be a little more mature. All VIP and other schemes should also be banned. If we can ban promotions in supermarkets for baby formula, we can do the same for gambling
Some of the stats here are scary. The one that really jumps out at me at the amount of children addicted
Gambling with Lives | Homepage
We're a community of families bereaved by gambling-related suicide that provides support, raises awareness of gambling disorder's devastating effects and campaigns for changewww.gamblingwithlives.org
I hadn't read the colour piece. I agree with some of it but not all. Take "loot boxes". As I understand it these are not gambling at all as there is no cash pay out. But the argument seems to be that it encourages a betting instinct even though the potential gains are not monetary. I am not sure about that at all. That sounds like real nannyism, similar to kids shouldn't be allowed toy guns.This is the opinion piece referenced in the OP, and this is the colour piece behind it.
We have the third highest per capita spend on gambling in the world. It's not hard to see from the gambling adverts on the TV how they target people on the lower end of the education scale. It's not just laddish sports, with bingo and other games targeting the ladies and loot boxes targeting the kids.
Certainly, we need to get the regulator up and running urgently, though the industry probably has vastly more resources available to it than the regulator will ever have. Just like the social media and gaming companies, they have the best of skills available to them to make the process addictive, to keep you coming back for a little bit more. I'm waiting for the Aaron Rogan book to come from the library, but I saw one article mentioning how they will throttle back on winning accounts, so if you are skillful or lucky enough to win consistently, you'll be restricted to smaller and smaller bets. There is far from a level playing field here.
Not sure it is 'nanny state' for the state to intervene to prevent ruthless businesses extracting money from those who don't really have spare funds, knowing that the state will be on the hook for health care, housing, welfare at the end of the day.
We still see a legacy of that law in media lotteries which are accompanied by a tie breaker "skill test" like "What is the capital of France, is it 1. Dublin 2. Paris or 3. London".
Yes possibly, but I think it is a legacy to the aforementioned law, otherwise just text Ok to the number.I thought that this practice was designed to boost numbers of calls to premium-rate entry phonelines.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?