Are we any better than drug dealers?

[Viscant]

The second graph has very much to do with sentencing and how we're dealing with drug offenders, both violent and non-violent. I won't turn this thread into a political debate but that graph doesn't exactly help the point it was going for.

Anyways on the topic of drug dealers. The common perspective people are having is the one drilled into our heads in 7th grade health class of the dealer giving you a break at first or even for free trying to get you addicted and then charging you through the nose when you couldn't break your habit. That's all kinds of wrong for so many reasons.
First off, modern day dealers aren't smart enough to have a business plan in place. Second off that business plan wouldn't even work because of how easy it is to get drugs these days. In any major city you can get anything you want and anyone even beginning their stay in the throes of addiction would know how and where to get the right price. The old stereotype of dealers as active sellers is so wrong these days.

In that sense I think poker players do have more in common with dealers than most of us would like to admit. Everyone knows that your money comes from those who make bad decisions. We tag and mark our fish as they keep coming back and keep losing money. For all these losers, this money has to come from somewhere. Most of us sit at tables with people who lose hundreds of dollars a day. These people aren't all rich executives who don't miss it. You have to come to grips with the fact that some people online, probably many of your favorite fish are just human beings with problems.

It's just a question of whether or not you have a problem with that. I'll tell you this. There's a fish who I particularly enjoy tormenting on Absolute. I search tables for him when I log on and he's good to drop a couple hundred today. He doesn't know why he loses always telling friends (not surprisingly, he has many online!) that he doesn't know why the cards never go his way. It might have something to do with him chasing inside straights for 3 bets repeatedly but I won't be the one to tell him.
Anyways, as he loses, he gets agitated and his play deteriorates into him swearing and getting himself up into a great lather. If he ever asked me what he should do, I would be honest with him and tell him to quit poker and never look back. His life would clearly be better without all the stress and hate that poker brings out of him and his life would CERTAINLY improve with an extra 5000 in his pocket, which is what I've personally seen him blow through in just a month of playing with him.
But it's much like how you all feel about telling others about 2+2. When they're ready to better themselves, they'll go to the right place. Until then, what they do is their business and not mine.

[peachy]

ok...u can say 1% of adults develop a gambling problem...BUT...u also HAVE to consider how many (or what percent) of adults play poker. Because lets say...50% (which is probably more than it truely is) of adults gamble then 1% of the entire adult population becomes MUCH more significant now...uve gotta take whole picture into consideration...stats people LUV to get tricky with thier wording [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[peachy]

[ QUOTE ]
Many drugs do NOT sell themselves. I include heroin and cocaine, plus some others.

Drug dealer SELL drugs. They create demand by, for example, downplaying the addictive dangers, extolling the pleasures, and providing them free or at low cost to non-addicts.

Without this marketing, far fewer people would become addicted.

Regards,

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree here...from personal experince in numereous ways ...cocain and heroine DO SELL THEMSELVES...no BODY asks a dealer "so what r the side effects?" nor is a dealer gonna put a warning label on his drugs "may cause addiction"...these drugs people DO out of personal curosity from either peers or maybe just the media coverage of a "new hip drug" or just want to try the next "level" of drugs...bottom line these "drug dealers" r just pushers for the MAJOR suppliers, and u dont see them out on the streets handing out pamplets on thier items or pushing people to try "harder" drugs

[JKDStudent]

Well, there are two ways of looking at it. The first way is that poker players, by necessity, live off of other people's money. They take advantage of others, emptying their pockets and filling their own. Sounds horrible when worded that way.

But look at it this way: This isn't a con. You're not selling someone land in Florida that doesn't exist. It is a business transaction. If someone goes to an amusement park, they pay money for the entertainment. They're not getting anything tangible for their admission, just the ability to ride the rides and see the shows. Poker is like that. The losing players are simply paying for the entertainment of sitting at the table. The money has to go somewhere, and since it's not going to the house, it's going to another player. You're not conning them, you're just charging admission.

I understand the moral issue of, "Is it right to take advantage of someone who has a problem?" No. But that's not what's happening at the poker table. First of all, you can't always tell if someone is a gambling addict, or if they're just on tilt or having a bad night. Secondly, you are not responsible for that person's actions. Let's look at it in terms of alcohol, and you run a bar. If an alcoholic comes into your bar, serve him. It was his choice. But if you coerce an alcoholic trying to get sober into coming in, ("Come on, man, just one drink won't hurt. It's my birthday! Don't you want to celebrate with me?") because you know you can take advantage of him, THAT'S wrong. The only difference there is that the bartender is legally obligated to cut him off after he's had too many, and no one kicks a guy off a table because he's lost too much money.

Conclusion: Shuffle up and deal.

[jimdmcevoy]

I reckon it comes down to free will. If you think the guy playing poker has free will, no worries. If you think he doesn't, then maybe it is wrong.

But if you too don't have free will, then no worries, you had not choice but to take his money [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
They create demand by, for example, downplaying the addictive dangers, extolling the pleasures, and providing them free or at low cost to non-addicts.


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume we are talking ILLEGAL drugs here...

Though the dangers might be downplayed and the pleasures extolled, never, ever, not even once that I have ever known of (and my knowledge in this area is, err, rather vast, but that's a different story) has any drug dealer provided drugs free or at low cost to anyone. The myth of dealers providing free or extremely cheap drugs to non-addicts as a means of getting them hooked is simply completely untrue, as it's impossible to turn a profit by giving them away. It was probably a story made up by texas cops.

I would not be so sure about this statement when it comes to the vast number of people addicted to LEGAL drugs. From our past conversations, I believe the consensus was (correct me if I am wrong) that the AMA is responsible for more drug addiction than anything else. I completely believe this to be true, as TONS of people are hooked on various medications like valium and xanax. Somehow I doubt it's a conscious effort by individual doctors to purposely get a specific patient addicted, but perhaps more a flaw of the socio-medical-pharmaceutical machine.

al

p.s. anyone who wants to know a ton about drugs from a great source should visit erowid.org

[Al_Capone_Junior]

from your second link:

[ QUOTE ]
Like any industry, the prison economy needs raw materials. In this case the raw materials are prisoners. The prison industrial complex can grow only if more and more people are incarcerated‹even if crime rates drop. "Three Strikes" and mandatory minimums (harsh, fixed sentences without parole) are two examples of the legal superstructure quickly being put in place to guarantee that the prison population will grow and grow and grow.



[/ QUOTE ]

NO doubt the private prison owners are heavily lobbying to make sure this keeps getting worse and worse. You see, there just aren't enough truly violent criminals out there to feed the socio-economic-prison system machine, thus the ridiculously harsh sentences for drug offenders.

Of course in places like texas, even the smallest drug offense is huge business for these profiteers, but violent crimes (such as beating your child till they have black and blue marks on their face, with pictures taken by the police to prove it) are not even a felony at all, and might just land you a stiff sentence like "disorderly conduct, $50 fine" for your 4th offense (true and very sad story).

al

[Freudian]

I think it's easier to ignore the negative side-effects of gambling when playing online. The non-physicality of makes the problems less obvious.

I can have sympathy with someone losing money he really can't afford. But ultimately it is a problem that has to be solved by him or people close to him. I don't expect anyone to feel sorry for me when I am running bad.

And another thing. I don't equate addiction with being a poor player. If I (a non-addict) would have sat down and played with Stu Ungar (an addict), he would most likely have cleaned me out. Would I have taken advantage of him, or vice versa?

[Snowslide]

Am I better then a drug dealer? I can't answer that right now.
My drug dealer is coming over for a home game on Friday night, I will get back to you guys and let you know if I am better than him!
I could not resist, and yes, this is an important post, but just adding some light hearted humor to a serious subject!

Some people obviously need help. Would you want to be helped if you were in their situation? I don't expect an answer for that Q, just something to think about!

peace,
*mike*

PS, If my drug dealer tries to buy in to the game with weed, do we take it at street value, or at his cost? If it is at cost, all I can say is he better have a few joints go around the table from his own stash!