Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Where is that "less than 1%" figure coming from or did you just pull that out from you-know-where?

And alcohol has always been highly accessible. I have 5 stores within a 5 minute walk of me that I can get it from, and that's not to mention all of the restaurants and bars within that same radius.

Addiction is addiction. Alcohol is one object of that addiction. Sports betting can be another. Porn, food, drugs, etc.

What's to say sports betting addiction won't become as severe as alcohol now that it's becoming more accessible to the public?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gambling_in_the_Uni...

>What's to say sports betting addiction won't become as severe as alcohol now that it's becoming more accessible to the public?

Because it's been accessible for over a hundred years in many countries, from 1861 in the case of Australian horse race betting.


Under 1% of the population is not the same as under 1% of people exposed, and if we dramatically increase exposure, we probably will proportionally increase problem gambling. Regardless, this is a good point, this isn’t nearly as high as alcoholism or even drug addiction, I suspect.


It's not nearly as available as alcohol or drugs. Of course the percentage will be lower.


Alcohol, sure, but if I wanted to start gambling on sports today, I could, but it would be harder to start abusing prescription drugs or opioids.


Completely misses the point.

You haven't addressed the problem of availability. It's one thing to go to the track physically to bet, vs having the track in your pocket available 24/7 with wagers on literally everything.

Do I think betting addiction will be as bad or prevalent as alcholism? Probably not, yet it's worth considering restricting it for social good. Just like we don't let 13 year olds buy bottles of whiskey.


Right, you could just walk down the street in 1861 and place a bet the way you could walk down the street and buy alcohol.

Wait, no. You couldn't.


[flagged]


I'm pretty sure the real fascists are the ones sending masked thugs to kill people in the streets. Reasonable regulation hardly meets the definition.


> Everything I don't like should be banned.

Ah yes, so reasonable. You remind me of the alcohol and marijuana prohibitionists. Tell me, how are your bans implemented? Do jack-booted thugs enforce said laws and throw people in cages, or does it somehow magically just... happen?


People betting online just destroy their families and cast their children into poverty.

And gambling restrictions are hardly fascist. Online sports gambling wasn't legal a scant 10 years ago. Were we living under fascism at that time?


> Think of the children!

Very familiar; nothing of substance.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: