OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Joachim:
Problem is that it can become a very expensive from of entertainment that can result in all sorts of crazy stuff. Such as kids locked in cars at Casinos, no money for food because the pokies ate it instead.
It is hard when a form of entertainment can be so obviously problematic to some - the question is - when is the social detriment worse by allowing it than banning it?
(aren't we all happy that a SEIV addiction is so comparatively cheap!)

And that would be why it is an idiot tax for the rest of the population, as I alluded.

Seriously though, all banning gambling does is cut back on it and drive it underground; by regulating it you can at least get the taxes - the caveat being that gambling will go up, and with it comes a rise in the crime rate.

Originally posted by Erax:
Gambling is like drinking. Some people can do it for fun and others - for reasons we are only starting to understand - can't control it. And still others see absolutely no point at all in it.

There is no easy solution. Whether you allow it or outlaw it, someone will always be on the unfair side of the deal.

I would agree with that statement.

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Jack, do you want to play some 7 card roll your own, no peek, low spade in whole stud poker? Or do you prefer the odds of Black Jack?

No thanks - I don't find gambling entertaining enough to be worth the money spent.

Tesco, Loser, Dogscoff, Atrocities: Those are some methods for keeping it at the entertainment level, especially Atrocities's list of rules.

By the way, Atrocities: You forgot to include 8) Know when to hold 'em, 9) know when to fold 'em, 10) know when to walk away, and 11) know when to run (although they should go just before #7).