Should there be Government Regulation in the Gambling Industry?
Should the government regulate online gambling at all?
In this article, we will analyze the positive and negative aspect as far as government regulation of gambling as an activity is concerned.
Most people appear to enjoy gambling. You are not surprised, aren't you? Many opportunities exist, ranging from lotteries to all kinds of casinos. Either found in your town or on the Internet, many people will try to gain some extra income while having some fun. Be that as it may, even though more and more people use the gambling industry at their disposal, many people claim that someone should raise awareness regarding the issue. In fear of more people to become addicted, children, in particular, they have insisted that lawmakers should intervene and try to make a change. For the better or for the worse? In an attempt to prevent further proliferation of gambling brands they raised a number of questions. Amongst them are questions such as: Should gambling be allowed at all? Should there be a blanket ban? If not, what forms of regulations should be brought in and how will this happen?
The case for government regulation
Here are the most common arguments of those who call for government regulation of gambling:
-
It is a widespread agreement that gambling is one of the most addictive activities. Driven by greed, people want to escape from reality and to let the steam off. By doing this they can gain some extra income and stabilise their financial situation.
-
When you deprive people of something they take pride in, a black market is sure to form quickly. This can happen to be detrimental to the whole economy of one country. If you ban such a thing, then it will go illegal for sure. Take weapons for example. A further point is the Americans know from personal experience that a mere ban is not how the things should work. A good example is the prohibition of alcohol between 1920-1933. Why believe that now the situation will be different when we can categorise both the alcohol and gambling as equally addictive. Why ban something when some people cannot control themselves? If it is not the gambling it will be something else. Should we ban everything then?
-
There is evidence that gambling can ruin families. Some people get addicted so heavily that all they want to do is sitting in front of the screen and try to make some money. This ruins relationships, families, and even lives. Imagine betting your salary or your home and then lose. What seems a good solution is halting the advertising, at least at peak hours. This is what PlayOJO did in Sweden in order to reduce exposure within the younger generation.
-
Drug control requires urgent government regulation, so does gambling. Unlike drug addiction, however, it is hardly unlikely to understand who is addicted to gambling and who is not. Addicted people usually do not have distinguishing characteristics such as facial expression etc. They are just ordinary people with an innate issue which has to be overcome. In order to save families, prevent children from being raised in an unhealthy family, or escape from no finance at all, legislators should regulate the market. Gamblers sell their soul to the devil, at least this is what most of the people believe. Literally, the most addicted sell all they have just to spend one hour in the casino. If this is not a convincing reason why to regulate gambling, I don't know what is.
-
What does gambling cause to you? The first thing that will come to your mind is ruining your future. Likewise, it is time-consuming, meaning that spending the whole day gambling is not unlikely for those who are addicted. Tell me why not start a new job, set up your own business instead of gambling. Is this more likely to provide you with more income?
-
Another thing to bear in mind is that legislators should take care of people. Gambling influences your life, which means that it is potentially harmful. A reasonable decision will be to create new government regulations in order to maintain the society overall wellbeing. Why risk people ending up homeless and with no life when the government can enact new laws and protect people from declaring bankruptcy.
-
In terms of the economy of one country, regulating the gambling industry can lead to valuable tax revenue. Without dispute, people will continue gambling. Why not use this as an advantage to benefit one whole country? Without enacting regulations, the government is missing a chance to make some tax money. When it comes to gambling, the establishment always makes money by not stating the true odds. Regulating this establishment will potentially mean that the country will make more money. This sounds promising for smaller countries with smaller tax revenue, in which the issue with gambling is more common.
-
There is a wide variety of examples with individuals ruining their lives by sparing most of their money on gambling. When grown adults are capable of causing such self-destruction to themselves, government intervention seems of paramount importance. Also, if not the government, it is hard to say who will be able to do this.
Some of the arguments of the proponents of government regulation can be found in the video below, where Evelyn Masotja argues for government Regulation and “combating” of online gambling in South Africa.
The case against government regulation of gambling
Of course, many people fiercely opposed the idea of future gambling regulation. Some of the arguments here are quite persuasive, check below:
-
A blanket ban is not a good idea! Like all activities which bring you pleasure in life, gambling is addictive as well. But does this really mean that there should be a ban? Currently, there is an age restriction, meaning that only adults can gamble. Every adult is responsible for his acts. So, we cannot take into account only those who are not responsible. What about the responsible adults? If you are addicted, you can just take your life in hands and try to find help for yourself in order to stop.
-
Government is responsible for ensuring every single citizen does not get a gambling addiction. If they hadn't undertaken further steps so far, then why they should start doing it right now. By and large, it is not their addiction, it is ours. Only God can judge us, right. So, why to regulate something, most people derive pleasure from.
-
Is really the government responsible for curbing addictions? What does addiction really mean? When we can say for sure that someone is addicted or is just having fun? Regulation, too, is an ambiguous term ordinary people use in every field. All in all, it is not the casinos who make the people bankrupt, it is their incapability of exercising self- control. Let me give you an example with alcohol again. Apart from some store-to-store agreement, there are no further regulations. Likewise, the European Union strives for free movement of goods. This includes cigarettes and alcohol as well. Why not use the same policy for gambling. Gambling should not be regulated as long as people can pay the venue or person involved, don't you agree?
-
Furthermore, gambling is a legal activity and reasonable people should be able to make a good judgment. When it is legal, why should the government regulate it? Aren't there more important fields in which regulation is urgent? People should be able to think about their life and the government or other regulatory agencies should not intervene with these decisions. Many people suffer from obesity, for example. However, there are not any restrictions on food consumption as far as I know. It is not our job to step in people's lives and tell them how to lead as long as it is legal, of course.
-
Every person should be able to decide how to spend his own money. I do not deny the fact that it is addictive, but it is every individual's job to seek help, not to expect the government to force it upon them. What is addictive for someone is not addictive for someone else. Why deprive someone of the joy of his life when someone else cannot make use of this thing correctly? As a former tennis player, I am addicted to tennis. I usually gamble who will win the Grand Slams but this doesn't mean that the government should intervene. Even if the government decide to enact new regulations, people will continue to gamble as there are many ways to do so.
-
There is no reason which is convincing enough to regulate addictive behaviour. Different people, different addictions, right? If I have sex addiction, will this mean that the government should allow having sex only on Friday night, or only when you are sober?
- Even though online gambling can be commonly addictive, there should be no government regulations. It should be up to the individual to exercise self control and limit their own habits of gambling. Any activity people use in excess is addictive. This can include alcohol, sex, sport, even reading books. Reasonable people should not treat gambling any different than the rest of these, and the responsibility should lie in the hands of every user.
The Libertarian case against government regulation of gambling
Negative liberty is a distinguishing characteristic of libertarian ideology. The quote outlawing online gambling, from U.S. Congressman Ron Paul perfectly exemplifies this statement. He is the most libertarian contender nowadays for the nomination of a major political party:
The most basic principle to being a free American is the notion that we as individuals are responsible for our own lives and decisions. We do not have the right to rob our neighbors to make up for our mistakes, neither does our neighbor have any right to tell us how to live, so long as we aren't infringing on their rights…. There are those that feel online gambling is morally wrong and financially irresponsible, which I do not argue with, but they also feel that because of this, the government should step in and prevent or punish people for taking part in these activities. This attitude is anathema to the ideas of liberty.
It appears that Libertarians have philosophy which opposes to any particular moral code upon others. Bear in mind that Paul is not stating that gambling is morally acceptable. On the other hand, he stresses that negative liberty has a moral value which affects other moral considerations. It seems that Libertarians are willing to reject both liberal and conservative concerns. Both ideas for social justice and concerns for respecting the current social structure when they happen to conflict one another when it comes to individual liberty. The main purpose of this study is to recognise that these observations affecting moral values and to examine whether so-called libertarians place utmost importance on liberty and a lower value on other moral concerns.
The Liberty point of view regarding gambling explained in a couple of videos
Ron Paul Tells House Judiciary Committee to reject Online Gambling Ban
Internet Gambling Ban and Crony Capitalism
So, here we have it – you can vote on your own.
Our overall listing of the best casinos on the market now.
First Deposit Bonus:
