Supreme Court lifts federal ban on sports betting

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Your end argument is essentially, legalize crack and businesses can sell it to kids cause they don't give a fuck and shouldn't have to, it's about making a dime. At some point businesses either have to care or be told how to care.

Personally I am for the legalization of sports betting as long as it's regulated properly.

You liberal kiddos that love to condemn western civilizations - inyet cherry pick countries that legalized all drugs (and crime dropped 99.9999999% /stawman) - but then you condemn it in other instances locally.... is rather hilarious.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,079
21,200
136
You liberal kiddos that love to condemn western civilizations - inyet cherry pick countries that legalized all drugs (and crime dropped 99.9999999% /stawman) - but then you condemn it in other instances locally.... is rather hilarious.

Most liberals in regards to drug policy would be to legalize marijuana period and the decriminalize the rest so users don't get criminal charges for an different problem. Decriminalize is far different than legalizing.

What would your libertarian world of people making choices and businesses being able to sell how they wanted to just make money. What's your drug policy look like
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Most liberals in regards to drug policy would be to legalize marijuana period and the decriminalize the rest so users don't get criminal charges for an different problem. Decriminalize is far different than legalizing.

What would your libertarian world of people making choices and businesses being able to sell how they wanted to just make money. What's your drug policy look like

Decriminalize... now then, how do you propose that drugs make there way to consumers hands (to consume) in a reputable manner - wherein the users are not at risk for drugs that are laced with other chemicals?

That's just one example - but the list goes on on and on and on and on - you can get down to the nitty gritty of the additional fact that buying the drugs illegally contributes to crime instead of employment of reasonable people... to deny these additional facts is just pulling your head further into your anus.... As if you haven't done that enough already.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,632
4,683
136
Awesome, just in time now that video games are integrating literal gambling mechanisms as key components of gameplay.

And evangelicals will flip and be ok with it as they'll probably start enabling some lotto for their churches (isn't that what the Peter Popoff was basically already doing?).

LOL. Peter Popoff is not an evangelical.
He is a con man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thebobo

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
The "catch" everyone missed was the wording "organized crime".
The reasoning that sports betting was banned in the first place was to keep "organized crime" out of sports.
Well, that is about to change big time.
Betting was happening all along, but now the difference will be it can be done in the light of day.
And if anyone doubts that organized crime is not celebrating big time, you don't know much about organize crime.
In todays world organized crime is better known as Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, the US Stock Exchange, American Express, Bank Of America, and now add to that The US Supreme Court.

So, what's next?
Well, we will need to ask old Chuck Grassley US senator from IOwa.
We can expect new and harsher laws concerning the middle class and their right to Bankruptcy.
Or more likely, eliminating bankruptcy all together except for the Donald Trump's of society.
Because... if there is one thing organized crime hates more than anything is poor middle classed debtors skipping out on their gambling obligations.
And who shall the mob turn to to protect their interest? The US Congress.

How blind we have become. How clueless. How trusting. Schmucks!
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,198
18,669
146
Decriminalize... now then, how do you propose that drugs make there way to consumers hands (to consume) in a reputable manner - wherein the users are not at risk for drugs that are laced with other chemicals?

That's just one example - but the list goes on on and on and on and on - you can get down to the nitty gritty of the additional fact that buying the drugs illegally contributes to crime instead of employment of reasonable people... to deny these additional facts is just pulling your head further into your anus.... As if you haven't done that enough already.

Decriminalized drug policy doesn't make that assertion. Decriminalization says, hey....were not going to toss a bunch of drug addicts in jail.

Drugs such as cocaine or heroin aren't manufactured in the USA in any quantity that matters. Regardless, those drugs are manufactured by reasonable people on the whole. People forced to do it, people who dont have other job prospects, people who just want to feed their families, the list goes on. Regular people.

People who control the drugs, are the ones you're referencing.

Your faux concern is noted.

Tainted drugs happens, but it's not the main problem with drugs like heroine anyways.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,817
136
A business is not human. It doesn't know what morals are. It isn't meant to study the human psychology - specifically on a case by case basis of those who are subjected to addictions vs. those that aren't. That is why prohibition came about, and that is why the american public got fucking pissed off for infringing on our rights.

"knowingly take advantage" - You're honestly smoking something. Businesses don't give a single fuck about you. They don't care if you're vulnerable or invulnerable. They just care if you buy the product or service. That's how it should be. Or is a company a breathing, living entity?
Businesses don't care about people, that was my point. They do however care about people's money, and they know how to exploit loopholes in human psychology to further their goals. This is the whole idea of marketing.

Casinos love to market to the vulnerable and sell themselves as a real get rich quick system. Further the games themselves are designed to give people a rush, and to make them feel like they are winning even when they are losing and there is always a jackpot just wait to turn around your bad luck. Casinos are very interested in human psychology, and are matters of taking advantage of it.
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,338
1,215
126
Gamboling depends on the fact that people are easily addicted to behavior that gives an occasional reward regardless of win loss considerations long term. It's just another way to make a profit on the manipulation of brain chemicals, no different, really, than selling drugs.

So should we have a "war on gambling"?
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,222
10,877
136
Although, I don't subscribe to it much anymore, there are some timeless truths in the bible.
Money, is the root of all evil. That's all we seem to use as a motivation for making or letting things happen anymore.
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,338
1,215
126
Ok - But where do you draw the line?

I see people addicted to alcohol, should we limit alcohol sales (beer, wine, liquor) for everyone based on some morons? Might as well bring back prohibition.
I see people addicted to consumerism - every year they need to buy another fucking 70" TV with ultra surround sound durpa derp derp. But don't worry! You can still own it for the low price of $30/month for the rest of your life! No worries!

There will always be morons. There will always be people that will be taken advantage of. Understand this: A fool and their money are soon parted. It's not a matter of IF it will be parted, it's just a matter of WHOM will part it from them. If it's alcohol, gambling, sex, timeshare companies, con artists, hobos, etc... does it really matter? At least with gambling part of it goes to taxes.
And just think how much better it will be once the US starts giving out a basic income. Good times. Can't wait for that "wealth redistribution" move.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
So how does this decision effect Jeff Sessions war on pot? Will that case hit SCOTUS?
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,222
10,877
136
So how does this decision effect Jeff Sessions war on pot? Will that case hit SCOTUS?
The pot people just have to figure out how to get some cash to this administration. Have we not figured out how this administration works?
 

DrunkenSano

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2008
3,892
490
126
This is a superb change. Next they need to lift the ban on marijuana and then prostitution. Legalize and regulate both.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
So should we have a "war on gambling"?
Yes, so long as it is conducted within, against ones faulty nature. Sometimes it's a difficult struggle. I am often asked to buy lotto tickets for someone in my family, something my inertia and logic are totally opposed to, but the numbers are the same every week and if those numbers came up and I had said no, well let's just say I don't want to be around to hear about that. So my battle is with superstition, the feeling that sure as shit if I don't buy those tickets, one of them will win, that the whole of the universe is set up especially to fuck me. So for me gambling is just a way of avoiding the terror of the repercussions of what somebody else would be to me if I failed to play when I would have won. At millions to one that is way way too much risk for me. Color me weak.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,079
21,200
136
Decriminalize... now then, how do you propose that drugs make there way to consumers hands (to consume) in a reputable manner - wherein the users are not at risk for drugs that are laced with other chemicals?

That's just one example - but the list goes on on and on and on and on - you can get down to the nitty gritty of the additional fact that buying the drugs illegally contributes to crime instead of employment of reasonable people... to deny these additional facts is just pulling your head further into your anus.... As if you haven't done that enough already.

You want to legalize heroin?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Decriminalize... now then, how do you propose that drugs make there way to consumers hands (to consume) in a reputable manner - wherein the users are not at risk for drugs that are laced with other chemicals?

That's just one example - but the list goes on on and on and on and on - you can get down to the nitty gritty of the additional fact that buying the drugs illegally contributes to crime instead of employment of reasonable people... to deny these additional facts is just pulling your head further into your anus.... As if you haven't done that enough already.

That is why it should be legalized and not just decriminalized. Ther pharmaceutical companies would be tripping over their dicks to get in on selling heroin and coke to US users. With that said, all of the stuff you brought up is already occurring and locking people up for using drugs or possessing small amounts doesn't help anyone including society. As a matter of fact it hurts just about everyone involved including society and the taxpayers which means it's fucking stupid to keep doing it.

To use your phrase, getting down to the nitty grit of the fact that the war on drugs has not only failed it has failed spectacularly. Drugs are cheaper than they were before it started, in a lot of cases they are stronger, more people are using them, we now have the distinguished title of being #1 in incarcerations with almost 25% of the worlds prisoners, millions upon millions more on some form of probation/parole, beyond the initial cost of incarceration to the taxpayers these non-violent offenders are now felons and their future employment options are severely dimenished hurting both the person and society in the long run, deaths from overdoses reached "epidemic" levels long ago and increased 30% last year alone, said overdoses and the vastly increased number of people shooting up heroin was predicted by medical professionals and law enforcement as a direct result of the War on Drugs going after the prescription opiod "epidemic" so now instead of people taking very precise dosages of pharmaceutical drugs they are injecting street drugs of completely unknown strength from batch to batch BUT the abuse of drugs like Oxy are way down (umm, good job War on Drugs?)

I could go on if you'd like but yeah getting down to the nitty gritty it looks like the status quo is not only not helping but it is hurting. When you find out that something you are doing is actually hurting and having the opposite effect than what is desired what do you suppose the first thing you should do is? STOP FUCKING DOING IT

One very simple change of ending the practice of charging people with crimes and locking them up for using/possessing drugs and taking even a portion of the savings to taxpayers and investing that into treatment programs would not only save the taxpayers a bunch of money right now but also a metric ton in the future. It would also have nice side effects like fewer people using, fewer people dying, a reduced strain on our ERs (and you don't think the guy ODing has insurance do you?) a vast amount of police and justice department resources freed up for violent/property criminals, would be better for families, fewer people financially fucked, fewer people in jail, jails that aren't 30-50% over capacity leading to even further inhumane conditions, and a bunch I can't think of at the moment.

So, reasons for keeping the status quo?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thebobo

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,939
7,456
136
Wow. Must be a slow year at the supremes. I'm so glad people will find more ways to throw away their money. Seems like something that should be on the bottom of a priority list.


Their priority list is more like a list of cases to avoid rather than ones to wrestle with.