Sports gambling exists all around the world and less than 1% of people develop serious addictions, far less than develop alcohol addiction. It's not fair to ban the fun for everyone just because a small subset of people can't control themselves.

▲

AlexandrB 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I'm sympathetic to this perspective, but the downstream negative externalities of sports gambling aren't just what happens to gambling addicts. The whole sport starts to revolve around the gambling - including strong incentives for players to "throw" games. I don't think integrity in sports can co-exist with a massive, legal gambling industry.

▲

giwook an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

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?

▲

utternerd 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Drunk drivers kill people, people betting online do not. You fascists need to stop trying to control everyone.

▲

logicchains an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

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.

▲

sojournerc an hour ago | parent | next [-]

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.

▲

seizethecheese an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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.

	▲	giwook 36 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It's not nearly as available as alcohol or drugs. Of course the percentage will be lower.

▲

giwook 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

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.