> Prohibition doesn’t work.

Actually, it did work [1]:

> Courtwright’s The Age of Addiction has the statistics: “Per capita consumption initially fell to 30 percent of pre-Prohibition levels, before gradually increasing to 60 or 70 percent by 1933.” That suggests a 30 percent reduction, at a minimum, in consumption — although that was less than the initial effect, as people figured some ways around the law.

> We should allow people the freedom to participate in vice.

There is literally no individual upside to gambling and don't say "winning". For sites like FanDuel and DraftKings, you get banned or your bet sizes severelyl restricted if you consistently win [2]. Why? Because it discourages the marks if they don't win occasionally.

Suicide rate is highest among gambling addicts than any other form of addiction [3]. Gambling measurably increases credit score drops, debts and bankruptcies [4]. The entire business is predatory.

At least back in the day when you had to go to a casino there was some barrier to gambling. Now? Just pull out your phone.

[1]: https://archive.ph/l8m4E#selection-885.0-889.319

[2]: https://www.elitepickz.com/blog/do-sportsbooks-ban-winners-a...

[3]: https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/problem-gambl...

[4]: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/online-sports-gamb...

> For sites like FanDuel and DraftKings, you get banned or your bet sizes severelyl restricted if you consistently win

Can confirm this in Australia too. They give you progressively worse odds if you win. And they give you progressively better odds if you keep losing, to keep you coming back.