Comment 83882

By CaptainKirk (anonymous) | Posted December 14, 2012 at 08:59:19 in reply to Comment 83881

Devil's advocate role here:

Why not minimize gov't restrictions, and only ban "Some populations are more vulnerable to problem gambling and its negative effects: particularly, youths, seniors, First Nations people and people with low incomes." so that the nanny state can protect those that need it, and allow "freedom" for the majority?

Also..."Problem gambling is mainly related to slots, not lottery cards, internet gambling, poker, football pools, and so on." Solution: Don't have slots, or limit playing on them.

"because the gambling facility is itself essentially a state enterprise and its purpose is to generate public revenue, it's incumbent on us to make sure we're getting a clear picture of the social and economic implications of a state-run gambling facility." -- Would the same apply to LCBO? Would like to know equivalent stats about alcohol use/abuse

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds