Club-based gambling web sites
- Thread starter Coxy
- Start date
Jeba
International
- Mar 4, 2008
- 6,501
- 244
Nashy said:
With your debit card? As in Visa Debit or Debit Mastercard? Can't get one if you're under 18. That's the way with the banks as far as I know. And you can't simply use your ATM card for online betting.
As for the using a stolen credit card argument, how many people do you know who wouldn't report their credit card stolen if they had it stolen? And if there were tranactions there they didn't authorise, just lodge a dispute. Simple as that. Eventually they get their cash back. Inconvenient, yes, but it hardly stops you from putting food on the table. Irrelevant argument.
Jeba
International
- Mar 4, 2008
- 6,501
- 244
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?
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?
- Mar 5, 2008
- 54,688
- 35,013
Jebadude 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.
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.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 6,522
- 2,807
Nashy said:
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:
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:
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
- Mar 4, 2008
- 6,501
- 244
mick! said:
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?
- Thread starter
- #51
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.
.......................................
.......................................
