Park Place bans Problem Gamblers

[rharless]

Bizarro world...

Casinos Start List of Problem Gamblers (http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=FF-APO-1110&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20031209%2F131468848.htm&sc=1110&photoid=20 031121NJMG101)

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

People can be placed on the company's ``Responsible Gaming List'' by voluntary self-exclusion - or involuntarily if casino employees learn any of its patrons are problem gamblers.

By what process do casino employees "learn" that someone is a "problem gambler."

A barred person could be kicked off casino property and forced to forfeit all winnings,

So let's understand this. One day a casino employee learns that Mr. X is a "problem gambler." The next day Mr. X wins a progressive slot jackpot and the casino repossesses said jackpot?

How very noble of them. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[andyfox]

[Easy E]

Dammit, WHY do we have a picture of a poker game at the top of an article on problem gamblers?

As to the concept itself- can you say "lawsuit protection"?

[rharless]

[TJSWAN]

[ QUOTE ]
As to the concept itself- can you say "lawsuit protection"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly,

Just watched a very interesting movie called "Owning Mahoney" Based on the true story of a bank executive from Canada who embezzled and then blew $10,000,000.00 back in the 80's at Atlantic City.( Good movie by the way.)

The bank sued the casino and it was settled out of court.

Tim

[mosch]

[Gildersneeze]

Jesus, you people are just like the cats at Slashdot or Something Awful. One little news story taken out of context becomes the end of the frikkin' world.

"Persons would not be involuntarily put on the list just for gambling a lot, but could be listed if casino staffers heard them express fear of financial ruin or other such comments."

Fear of financial ruin as in "not your bank roll, your REAL money."

I'm sure they will do their research into the situation, and talk to the person directly. They don't just walk up to some guy and say "hey, you, you've been on a losing streak, but you won't give it up! Give us all your chips and get the hell out!"

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

"Persons would not be involuntarily put on the list just for gambling a lot, but could be listed if casino staffers heard them express fear of financial ruin or other such comments."

Here's a novel idea. Why don't we treat people like adults and let them bear the responsibility for, and consequences of, their decisions?

They don't just walk up to some guy and say "hey, you, you've been on a losing streak, but you won't give it up! Give us all your chips and get the hell out!"

I'm not so trusting.

[Zele]

[Gildersneeze]

[ QUOTE ]

Here's a novel idea. Why don't we treat people like adults and let them bear the responsibility for, and consequences of, their decisions?

[/ QUOTE ]I'm all for it. I live in a state where almost all kinds of gambling is illegal. The current platform is twofold. One is the whole Bible Belt thing (I'm in North Carolina), apparently some people think "de Debbil hisself" will take over the world if people are allowed to wager money on games of chance, or at least North Carolina will spiral into a hellhole of sin and devilry. The other is the classic PC cop out for most vice laws. "We're protecting people who may have gambling problems from possible financial ruin!" Well, I'd estimate that actual problem gamblers aren't nearly as prolific as the anti-gambling lobbyists in this state would like you to believe, but since most average American idiots believe any statistic thrown at them by any kind of federal official about drugs, guns, gambling, addictions, and anything else that eventually leads to more vice laws, our state outlaws gambling. Basically, it means that to protect a tiny minority that could develop some sort of problem based on a vice, we prohibit EVERYONE from doing something. Fantastic logic there. Oh no! An anthill! Better break out the fecking 40 megaton A-bombs, boys!

So no need to tell me about these idiotic practices of not letting adults make decisions for themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not so trusting.

[/ QUOTE ]I'll trust it to a point. Once I hear of an incident like the one I described, I'd be all kinds of behind a boycott of some kind. Tell people in the old fashioned, capitalist way what you think. When Park Place regulars stop going because they have to worry about their winnings being seized thanks to a losing streak, I'd imagine you'll see a DAMN quick 180.

[stickman]

I am a floorman in AC for this piss poor company. The only reason they are doing this is to protect themselves. It has to do with some legal issue to protect themselves from lawsuits. Which in turn, they are trying to make look like a noble gesture.
PPE(Park Place Entertainmet) or Caesars World Entertainment( as it will be known after the New Year) is a stingy company that would gladly take every last penny from you if they could.
When they bought Caesars in AC they dropped all of the table maximums and chased away all big play to Borgata. They made it an extension of Bally's (where I work).
Please do not patronize any properties of this greedy ..greedy company.

[RydenStoompala]

I'm with stickman on this. It's like reading a story about Philip Morris not wanting me to smoke cigarettes. What a pile of smelly poop. There is a large stack of litigation heading the way of the gaming industry now that the big class action firms have sucked the pipe dry in software, cigarette and faulty tire suits. This is nothing more than anticipation of ambulance chasing. What will really tip us off to the truth is when the big actions are launched on behalf of some dork with no self control against a big strip casino company while the hundreds of little casinos that are sucking the life out of many small communities escape the fuss. Why? Who wants to sue for a million when you can go for 100 million? Oops. I'm sounding a little negative. Nevermind. I'm sure the lads who are handing bags of cash over to local politicians and fixers are just looking out for our best interest.