Last night I was the guest speaker at the group meeting of the Derby Advanced Riders group.
On the way up to the meeting I stopped at Leicester Forest East services to meet a colleague who was coming with me.
I went and got a coffee and wondered back to the front door to meet my colleague and have a smoke which is by the gaming zone.
There was a chap playing the slot machines, and in the 10 minutes or so it took me to drink my coffee I watched this bloke stuff £10 notes into the machine as quick as he could. I counted at least £200 go in, and not once in the time I was watching did I see him win so much as a bean, and I guess the fact that he was sat on a stool, he had probably been there for some time before I saw him, and he was still playing when my colleague and I left 20 minutes or so later, so I hate to think how much he spent.
My initial thought was that maybe he is a gambling addict, but either way, just on the amount of cash I saw him put in, it was a good reminder as to why I have no interest in gambling as I immediately thought of a lot of things I would rather spend that amount of cash on and at least have something to show for it
I remember reading a while ago about some machines that had note readers that couldn’t identify a really good fake note, people got thousands of fake notes changed by putting in lots of fakes and winning the jackpots… Also could be used for money laundering i suppose if you change your jackpot win for legitimate cash winnings…??
And NJ is right, one of two decisions that were appalling. the other was the removal of restrictions on advertising. Now it is every where like a modern plague.
Not necessarily…I think freedom of choice is key and having draconian laws telling me what i can and can’t do due to a nanny state is far worse IMHO.
The guy spending all his money on the machine is probably on benefits anyway…It’s the only way you can afford to live an extravagant life style these days :Whistling:
I agree with your concerns regarding individual liberty and an over prescriptive state.
But it was obvious to most rational people at the time that relaxing laws on gambling would result in considerably more negative outcomes for society than positive ones.
The govt. ministers involved have now admitted that they were wrong to relax the legislation because problems associated with gambling have increased considerably since the legislation was relaxed.
The freedom of choice argument has to be subject to rational examination just like anything else - in this case freedom of choice has led to an increase in negative effects for individuals and society rather than an increase in positive effects.
So in this case the freedom of choice argument does not stand up to rational scrutiny.
Fair call on this argument…I not really up on all the gambling laws that were relaxed but i do know that there are multiple laws introduced that just seem to take away peoples freedom of choice
Your argument is a fair one though… A few rules for the greater good are obviously a good thing…The no smoking inside a public place rule is another good one…
You talk to anyone who’s quit smoking, you’ll hear usually a very long tale of quitting unsuccessfully a few times over many years, getting help in terms of nhs advice and products to help quit and still not being able to quit. Also on top of that, smoking does not mean you lose your home, putting you further in debt therefore hooking you more into gambling…
Talk to these same people about when they were smoking, and you’ll find few had freedom of choice…
I’ve seen friends feck up big time, luckily I hate losing and never win on the horses etc :crazy: I have a very addictive personality and have enough vices already!
Completely not true NJ. People who are inclined to gamble will find a way, especially with the internet/mobile making it widely available to everyone.
The issue can be handled one of two ways:
UK - Accept that people will gamble whatever. Regulate the market so that tax £’s from UK citizens come to the UK govt (and that those taxes are spent on helping problem gamblers) and that operators are highly regulated. In this case regulated means ensuring that winners are dealt with fairly - actually paid when they win and have someone to go to if they believe that’s not the case. Also gamblers who admit to themselves that they have a problem can easily find help (look at any UK site and see GambleAware, etc, etc logos everywhere). UK regulation means that it is possible to be proactive about helping people before they admit to themselves that they have a problem.
USA - Bury your head in the sand and pretend that nobody gambles. Force betting operators underground into a betting black market, from where problem gamblers cannot get any assistance and any bookmaker proceeds are going into the hands of (mostly) shady underworld gangsters. No stats about problem gamblers, because it’s illegal to bet online anyway, so who’s going to admit to illegal activity.
I can guarantee you that the stats will say we have more problem gamblers in the uk. But then statistics is the science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.
