Club-based gambling web sites

Jeba

International
6,501
248
Isn't that their responsibility? Why are the gambling sites in a position to say when somene has had enough?

Fair enough, when you've had too much to drink, you MAY be refused service. Which is a good thing because you've obviously had enough. But gambling offices aren't really in a position to tell you when to stop if they don't know anything about your financial circumstances. Why should it be their responsibility?
 

Hamm.0

NRL Captain
4,671
1
The L City
I think it's deplorable how the NRL is allowing these clubs to start online gambling websites. Think of the children.

Regards,
The VB Kangaroos & XXXX Maroons
 

Nashy

International Captain
Staff
39,900
14,849
Brisbane
Jebadude said:
Isn't that their responsibility? Why are the gambling sites in a position to say when somene has had enough?

Fair enough, when you've had too much to drink, you MAY be refused service. Which is a good thing because you've obviously had enough. But gambling offices aren't really in a position to tell you when to stop if they don't know anything about your financial circumstances. Why should it be their responsibility?
I'm sure if you were in the situation where you had a gambling problem, you would hope someone would tell you to stop.

People with gambling problems don't take the responsibility, that's the problem, that's why they have a gambling problem.

Betting Agencies should be able to refuse or limit service to anyone, and that doesn't just go for people who they think have a problem. Everyone should be limited.
 

Ari Gold

Master Baiter
6,524
2,862
Nashy said:
I'm sure if you were in the situation where you had a gambling problem, you would hope someone would tell you to stop.

People with gambling problems don't take the responsibility, that's the problem, that's why they have a gambling problem.
Agreed. It would be nice if someone could tell you to stop if you had a problem, and yes, they don't take responsibility. Same also go for obese people who just keep eating take away food etc. Do you also propose we ban these people from buying unhealthy foods?

Content of the discussion aside, the principle that it should be acceptable to protect people from their own stupidity in one form, but not in others, strikes me as being quite hypocritical.
 
Nashy said:
Jebadude said:
Isn't that their responsibility? Why are the gambling sites in a position to say when somene has had enough?

Fair enough, when you've had too much to drink, you MAY be refused service. Which is a good thing because you've obviously had enough. But gambling offices aren't really in a position to tell you when to stop if they don't know anything about your financial circumstances. Why should it be their responsibility?
I'm sure if you were in the situation where you had a gambling problem, you would hope someone would tell you to stop.

People with gambling problems don't take the responsibility, that's the problem, that's why they have a gambling problem.

Betting Agencies should be able to refuse or limit service to anyone, and that doesn't just go for people who they think have a problem. Everyone should be limited.
And what about bottle-o's that see the same customers lining up every day, or every week for a big shop. Is it the responsibility of the person behind the counter to send them packing because they drink too much?

And again, like Jeb said, what should the limit be? Limit it to a certain amount each week? Then why should someone on $250,000 per year be bound by the same restriction as someone on $40,000 per year? Okay, make it as a percentage of income? Then should betting agencies be privy to that sort of information in checking payslips and bank documents etc.?

Like alcohol, like poker machines, like strip clubs, like brothels, like a lot of things... online gambling on sports and other things is something which can be and is primarily used by responsible adults for entertainment only, and doesn't negatively impact on their lives. The fact of the matter is that this is something which is SO DAMN HARD to regulate. Is it the fault of a brothel that a man can't form a serious relationship with a woman because he's there three times a week? Is it the fault of bottle-o workers that you just quickly drank BOTH of those bottles of scotch they sold you this morning?

Personal responsibility. You're in control of your own actions, and you have to suffer the consequences. **

** within reason, of course. In fact, the biggest perps when it comes to trapping people with gambling are indeed the casinos - not online vendors. They're the ones offering people large amounts of bets on credit, treating them well, providing dinner and a private environment etc.

So long as online betting agencies allow people to punt with only the money they can deposit into their betting accounts, that's all sweet IMO.
 
Jebadude said:
Fair enough, when you've had too much to drink, you MAY be refused service. Which is a good thing because you've obviously had enough.
But that, even, is TOTALLY due to the fact that bars want to minimise fights, don't want alcohol poisoned patrons at their venue, want to limit damage done and essentially also to minimise the number of a range of issues which could lead to lawsuits.

Head to a bottle-o and buy 12 bottles of wine, and it's "thank you, sir". For all you know, you could drink all of them with lunch. Again, it's not in their store, so it's not their problem.
 

Jeba

International
6,501
248
mick! said:
Jebadude said:
Fair enough, when you've had too much to drink, you MAY be refused service. Which is a good thing because you've obviously had enough.
But that, even, is TOTALLY due to the fact that bars want to minimise fights, don't want alcohol poisoned patrons at their venue, want to limit damage done and essentially also to minimise the number of a range of issues which could lead to lawsuits.

Head to a bottle-o and buy 12 bottles of wine, and it's "thank you, sir". For all you know, you could drink all of them with lunch. Again, it's not in their store, so it's not their problem.
Exactly. And you'll get the venues like the Normanby who will serve you regardless of how much you've had.

Another example - what about the smoker who smokes a couple of packs a day? $20 a day, $140 a week, and I dare say a fair chunk of the gamblers in this country would gamble less than that per week. Whose responsibility is it to tell the smoker to stop smoking? The Night-Owl customer service attendant?
 

Nashy

International Captain
Staff
39,900
14,849
Brisbane
All very valid points guys, can totally understand what you are saying now, and really have no choice but to agree.
 

Coxy

International Captain
Yep, it's ok Nashy, these guys love pissing their money away on sinful gambling. Good luck to them. It's they who have to face up to their wives, girlfriends and boyfriends when they have to declare bankruptcy.

.......................................
 

Nashy

International Captain
Staff
39,900
14,849
Brisbane
I don't think anyone was mkaing a dick of themselves. I think this is probably one of the better debates BHQ has seen in months.

So claiming a forum victory just makes the other side look silly.
 
What does that even mean? I told Coxy his baiting made him look like a dick, and then you claimed my actions were silly after simply calling it a good debate.

So in the midst of a good debate, someone jumps in with some untruthful comments solely placed to get a rise out of the other side, and that's all sweet? Yeah, nice.

I'm sure there was some sort of official thing telling people not to troll and get into personal insults outside of General Talk, regardless...
 

Coxy

International Captain
mick! said:
Nashy said:
I don't think anyone was mkaing a dick of themselves. I think this is probably one of the better debates BHQ has seen in months.

So claiming a forum victory just makes the other side look silly.
As opposed to a certain someone doing the usual troll and bait?
LOLZ, so every topic I post you disagree with is me trolling and baiting? Deadset, read the first post again.

"In hard financial times such as these, more people seem to gamble so it makes sense to benefit off that"

People struggle for money.
People turn to gambling in the hope of making a quick buck.
We, an NRL club, will benefit from our fans' misery.

Tell me how that's not honourable?
Tell me how online gambling provides any benefit to our society?
You casual punters can walk into a TAB and do it that way, or over the phone.

It's not necessary online and I'd 100% support any government who outlawed internet gambling in Australia.
 
Coxy, you will also notice that I brought nothing up at all about baiting. Until this.

"Yep, it's ok Nashy, these guys love pissing their money away on sinful gambling. Good luck to them. It's they who have to face up to their wives, girlfriends and boyfriends when they have to declare bankruptcy."

SO.... can you please accept ONE thing and, for once in your life, admit that someone else is right when they tell you something you didn't initially agree with? Seriously, when you know that I, at least, rarely gamble and never ever in large amounts, then it is clearly a statement made only to get a response, and not something you know to be true.
 

Coxy

International Captain
Yes, but it was also noticeable that you and the other known gamblers here were like dogs with a bone on this topic, even though, as I just pointed out, my concern is not about casual gamblers, but that a club is knowingly trying to take advantage of addicts or people on the brink of financial ruin.

So no, you're not right. This service should not be available just so you can spend your $5 or $10 a week you want on gambling. There's other means to do it which are much better and more closely regulated.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create free account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Login or Register

Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Register now

Twitter

Top