OSU students oppose Eaton's position against gambling

Search

Another Day, Another Dollar
Joined
Mar 1, 2002
Messages
42,730
Tokens
OPINION -- Oregon State University's Philosophy 101 students wrote to Illinois Leader's Managing Editor Fran Eaton, voicing their disagreement with her arguments against legalized gambling as expressed in Illinois Leader's January 7, 2003 PRO/CON on the topic of legalized gambling.


__________

Mrs. Eaton:


I would have to disagree…

I read your article on why gambling should be illegal in Illinois, and I found it to be quite interesting. Although you made some very good points on the topic and included accurate statistics, there were some things you did not cover in your argument.


We are all aware of the risks of gambling, that it risks financial troubles, but why do we blame gambling for something we can walk away from? It is understandable that gambling may be addicting, but only if one makes it that way but like a lot of things addiction can be prevented by taking responsibility. If you cannot afford it, don’t do it. It is simple as that.


Some things left out of your statements are that of taxes, benefits of job opportunities, and crime rates. The state can impose a business tax on the money generated from gambling. The tax collected by the state can be used for a multitude of state programs such as education, social services, police, fire protection etc., all of which have been facing big cuts in their budget because of the shortfall in revenue collected by the state.


Another thing that was not looked into was crime. Gambling has been a place for people to turn to instead of being involved in crime, and has actually lowed crime rates. If taking gambling away, who knows, it is possible that crime rates might increase once again. You mentioned jobs created are low earning jobs that do not always benefit locals. Well, providing jobs always benefits people who need them, after all, it still pays.


In the statistics you provided, which were good to consider, were a somewhat dramatic. 17 percent were said to commit suicide according to your statistics, but of those 17 percent how many had psychological problems? Was it only gambling that caused these 17 percent to kill themselves? Going to the extreme of committing suicide is not something that should be blamed on gambling, there

is no logical reason to commit suicide in the first place, let alone blame it on gambling. Some bigger percentages were about getting out of debt and turning to others to bail them out, gambling is a responsibility and if you are aware of what you are getting yourself into, than you should be prepared for the outcome, no matter what it is.

Understanding that you are on the con side of gambling, I believe that there is more that should have been looked into, and some other issues that should have been taken into consideration. If it is said that casinos do everything they can to get people in the doors, that is the same as marketing does to young people, everything to get them to want ‘that’. There is nothing wrong by promoting something they believe in, and it is a choice, you can either take it or leave it. If you do not believe that gambling should be legal, then do not gamble, let others make it their own choice and to accept the responsibilities of gambling.


Amy Sugiyama
Oregon State University

_______________


Dear Mrs. Eaton,


After reading your editorial in the Illinois Leader on the internet, I was surprised at the ignorance in which you portrayed the legalization of gambling.


However detrimental its effects may be, the act of gambling has played a major role in both Eastern and Western civilization for many centuries. The banning of gambling not only poses as a “quick-fix”, but intrudes on citizen’s right to act upon free will.


Concurring with your statistics illustrated, gambling does unquestionably have negative effects upon society such as bankruptcy, increased poverty, and familial conflict. However, the solution for these economic concerns is not prohibition.


For example, consider the legalization of marijuana. Currently illegal, the usage of marijuana is not considerably reduced, nor are its consequent effects. Marijuana is everywhere, providing a source of income and a black market hierarchy. There is no way of controlling this market, as it will always have a job to do as long as marijuana remains illegal.


This brings in to question how gambling itself would be defined, and regulated.


Isn’t any form of wagering the outcome in essence gambling? You mentioned the Supreme Court of Illinois’ ruling that betting on horses wasn’t considered gambling, and this is a prime example of the technicalities that will be presented in banning gambling. If some forms of gambling are legal, the detrimental effects of gambling will certainly still persist.


Not all effects of gambling are detrimental either. You state that “legalized gambling doesn’t generate new wealth or high-end employment”. It does, however, provide employment all the same, and an opportunity for industry where there would otherwise be none (for example, the presence of casino’s on Native American reservations).


Unlike other addictions (alcoholism, drugs etc) however, gambling is not an in-taken substance. It is an action consciously undertaken repeatedly, with full knowledge of the odds, luck, chance etc. It is a human weakness, and the prohibition of it would simply acknowledge that we cannot control ourselves.


State intervention would be an outright denial of rights for those responsible gamblers who can control themselves, and simply engage in it for entertainment.


It insults our moral standing and worth as a society, and how can we endorse that to future generations?


Yours Sincerely,

Erika Ancien
Oregon State University

_____________


Dear Mrs. Eaton,


I thoroughly enjoyed reading your article, “Gambling should be illegal in Illinois.” The dangers of gambling need to be brought to the attention of our society and you do an excellent job of doing just so. However, I must say that I do not believe making gambling illegal is the answer.


There are many atrocities-other than gambling-in life which hinder us from living up to our full potential. This list includes: drinking, smoking, drug abuse, child abuse, etc. Sadly though, any attempt to stop these activities is extremely difficult. Making them illegal would only create an increased desire to engage in such activity.


When prohibition came into play, people went to great lengths, to obtain alcohol; the law didn’t stop them but only made them want to drink more.


Daniel K. Proft, who wrote the article titled, “Gambling should be legal in Illinois,” states that “banning something does not eliminate it. It just raises the cost.” As such, the prohibition act created chaos and confusion and essentially made the issue of drinking m-ore prevalent than it had been prior to prohibition.


Most likely, the same thing would happen if gambling were to be made illegal.


The concept of gambling, as horrible and damaging as it might be, is profound to many. People love going to Las Vegas for the simple pleasure of engaging in a little gambling action. If the law was to stop people from this, anger and frustration would build up and people would find methods of illegal gambling.


The initial problem of gambling would not be helped but probably made worse.


Though I do not myself like the idea of gambling and would never want to engage in it, I realize that it is a popular trend in our society. Instead of banning it, we should take steps to educate our youth on the dangers of gambling. As you stated, “Domestic violence, child neglect, bankruptcy and divorce naturally follow gambling addiction.”


The education method is likely to be much more effective than making gambling unlawful.


I am happy to know that there are people out there who are just as opposed to gambling as I am. Your efforts are much respected in my opinion and I hope that America can find a suitable way to reduce the gambling industry.


Sincerely,

Ashley Director
Oregon State University

____________

Mrs. Eaton:


I have just recently read your article in the Illinois Leader about making gambling illegal in Illinois. I am going to have to disagree with you. I think you should leave gambling legal.


In your article you made three key points: Gambling is detrimental to the low income population. It doesn’t create high end jobs. It leads to other problems like domestic violence, bankruptcy, and divorce.


To address your first point that gambling is detrimental to the poor communities I would have to say gambling isn’t the only detriment. Low

funding to the welfare state and education is detrimental to the poor communities.


I am sure that you would agree with me that poor communities need education so that the children can grow up, go to college and get higher paying jobs.


Has low funding of schools become illegal though? No it has not. In fact most schools are seeing an all time low in their funding due to federal cuts. The welfare state is also key to the assistance to the poor community. I don’t know what kind of argument you could make against job placement assistance, emergency childcare aid and HUD.


Under funding of these programs is also not illegal. So why are you trying to ban gambling under the guises of “it's bad for the poor”?


You say the poor can’t afford to be gambling their money away. This is true, but how many of them actually do? How many of the poor really do more than buy some scratch-its or a lotto ticket for a dollar? Later in your article you say, “about 40% of white collar crime is committed by gambling addicts.”


The poor are not considered white collar. The richest of the poor, the working class, are called blue collar. So where does the problem really lie. In the poor class or the upper middle class?


Your second point, “Legalized gambling does not generate new wealth or high-end employment. The jobs that are created tend to be low-earning positions at tracks, casinos, and lotto outlets, and don't always benefit the locals.


Area family businesses such as restaurants, grocers and clothiers, in fact, often suffer most,” I find very interesting. First off any jobs in a poor community are good for the citizens. There is no effort out there to try and put these so called “high end” jobs on the market in poor communities. So I am sure that any jobs in the poor communities are welcome. At the same time there are other businesses that join communities and push out local businesses as you say casinos will.


Big names like K-Mart and Fred Meyer with their low cost music selections pushed a local business, CD World, out of my community.


Should I start saying big businesses should be illegal? The last claim you make is the one that I have the biggest problem with.


You have this survey that shows these outrageous numbers of people who have gambling problems. Some of your numbers deal with suicide, crime and unemployment rates. My first question is how many people out of everyone that gambles has a problem? Knowing that would be very helpful. If it is only 5% of people out of everyone that gambles that actually have problems then these numbers are a little less inspiring.


I also do not know who did this “survey” and where and when. This gives your numbers even less credibility. I also have to think, “When have we ever passed laws to prevent unemployment and suicide?”


A report done by the Department of Health showed that gay and lesbian

youth are 5 times more likely to commit suicide than a heterosexual teen. In 1996, the leading cause of death for youth was suicide as apposed to the “17% of problem gamblers”. Yet no hate crime legislation has been passed to help prevent these suicides.


You also say that it leads to domestic abuse. I have studied domestic

violence for a few years now and what I have found is that if a man is

going to beat his wife, he is going to beat his wife. It doesn’t matter if it is because of his gambling debts or that his car broke down and he is in a particularly bad mood. If you are so concerned with things like that, start fighting for stricter domestic violence laws. Don’t go after something that if it has any effect at all will only affect a small proportion of the abused population.


There are many people that gamble and have fun. Just like there are

many people who drink and have fun. Just because people abuse these luxuries doesn’t mean that they should be illegal.


If you make gambling illegal it won't stop it. It will probably force it underground like prohibition did with alcohol. It is likely that the only people gambling will be the ones that you didn’t want

to be gambling in the first place. Even if it creates a small amount of revenue or only a few jobs it is better than nothing. There is also no excuse for taking a form of recreation away from responsible people that do not get addicted.


Joey
Oregon State University

_________


Dear Ms. Eaton,


Your views on gambling in Illinois are interesting and have many good points.

Gambling does negatively affect many families in the United States. I believe that this argument may be overlooking a key issue. Every individual must make decisions about his or her own life. When people drive down the street to work in the morning they can always decide not to go. This action would also devastate families who need the income to stay afloat in today's society.


These people make a decision to keep driving to work even though the easier alternative is presented. Gambling is a choice that each person makes for themselves. It is not the responsibility of others to make sure that these people make the right choice for their life.


There are no officials who sit in bars all day long to make sure that alcoholics don't come in and have a drink. Alcoholism is a huge problem in the United States but there are no laws barring of-age individual from having a drink whenever they please. These laws do not exist because we have the right to free choice. When people make decisions which negatively affect their lives they must pay for them. No one is to blame for that person's misfortune.


When people gamble they know the risks of the game. There are no excuses for people who get in over their heads. It has also been implied that this problem not only affects the individual but his or her family as well. Again, even the family must make decisions in their lives which are not easy. Everyone knew the repercussions of gambling. Even with the illegalization of gambling, society will continue the behavior no matter how self-destructive it may be.


The example of prohibition makes this decision hard because there is no reason to believe that gambling will merely fade away into the distance; just because the government decided that the idea wasn't good after all.


This world is full of temptation which its' occupants must deal with. Every married man has been tempted at one point in time or another when a picture of a beautiful woman is seen. It is up to that person to recognize the consequences of their actions and make adjustments accordingly. Temptation is simply just a part of being a human. Some people can deal with the temptation so they are in control of their own lives; others are not so fortunate.


Assuming that the ban of gambling will solve these problems is also quite eccentric. The government is acting as the disciplinary parent who believes that the child is not capable of making such an important decision. This way of thinking will infuriate the public. The Constitution has granted the population freedoms which they hold very dear. When these freedoms are taken away the public will put up resistance. I hope that this letter has given you an alternative view on the issue at hand. Sometimes the best way for people to learn is to make the mistakes and gain knowledge. Experience is often the best instructor.


Sincerely,

Nicole LaChapelle
Oregon State University

___________


Mrs. Eaton:


Your argument about gambling in Illinois is misleading at times. You're being biased and fail to mention any positive results that having a casino might bring into the state.


The casino bring extra money into the state, much needed money, supplies employment opportunity (though it is minimum wage like you stated) and though it won't create a drastic change in Illinois employment status, it will help.


Appealing to tradition or stating that legalized gambling is a "recycled cash cow" that has been destroying families and communites since the time of Jefferson was a nice try. Gambling hurts those who abuse it, but instead of stopping everyone from being able to make their own decision if they want to gamble, why not focus on ways to help the minority, those with actual gambling problems.


Gambling is an entertainment, a way that a lot of people go to have fun, to vacation, and to celebrate weddings, birthdays and other events.


You assume that the people who are reading this are ignorant. Your statistics are of problem gamblers not the general public. Problems like domestic violence was an attention grabber, but it is a fallacy and is a biased sample. Why sterotype problem gamblers as violent offenders who wouldn't be violent if it wasn't for gambling? Would they be your average Joe if they never gambled? Why don't you state what the other reasons for domestic violence?


As a read, I am supposed to assume that legalized gambling is a direct causation of such problems? How about the other problems that problem gamblers have had before gambling that may lead to domestic violence or disruption in the family?


I want to be charitable to your piece, but why aren't you being charitable to those who would like to have legalized gambling? Why make them spend their money in other states that do provide legalized gambling, you think that people with gambling problems won't go there?


Stop having "tunnel vision" and open your eyes. Your single-minded view of legalized gambling is disturbing. Yes, there are problem gamblers that hurt themselves and people around them, but they are the minority, what about the majority who go there (to the casinos) to have a good time, knowing they are going to lose, but hoping that the may win. I go expecting to lose, but it is no different when I go to the mall, the movies, theme parks, or anywhere, you still spend money, but at least at the casino I'll get a free drink!


Eric Vaughn
Oregon State University

_______________


Dear Mrs. Eaton,


I have to disagree with your opinion on legalizing gambling in Illinois, as per your January 7, 2003 web editorial on IllinoisLeader.com.

It was a nice surprise, however, that you didn’t just stick to moral points and you brought in numbers to support your side. Yet your arguments about casinos coming in too poor areas and exploiting lower classes by advertising to them specifically, because well, what companies don’t do that? They aren’t holding a gun to their head saying they must come gamble, it is just an advertisement, whether you let it sway you or not is still up to you.


I do agree with some of your general points, as in large corporations coming into poorer areas and forcing local businesses to go bankrupt and close down, the way you make your argument about that is uncharitable. You can’t just apply that action to casinos, but rather to large corporations as a whole who are notorious for it, such as Wal-Mart. Casinos do generate a large amount of jobs, whether they are low wage jobs or not doesn’t matter, if you don’t want to work there, again, no one is forcing you too just because it is a job. The same way that just because McDonalds is hiring and has open positions, it doesn’t mean you have to get a job there.


Your arguments about addiction and how gambling destroys people’s lives is again uncharitable, because you are picking only on casinos again. What about other addictions such as cigarettes, alcohol, and say, painkillers. These are all legal activities that have a large chance of causing addiction, unlike gambling whom your opponent says occurs in only 1.5-5% of gamblers. Cigarettes are highly addictive and often kill their users, alcohol is arguably the hardest addiction to break including illegal drugs like heroine. In these cases, losing all their money is a least of their worries, death being the most likely worry.


Using the numbers for the percent of addicted gamblers, 1.5-5%, how can that be enough to ban a practice entirely? 95-98.5% of gamblers don’t seem to have much of a problem, why punish the responsible ones? Are you going to try and ban the driving of cars because a certain percent, likely much higher than 5%, drink and drive or speed, or have gotten into accidents? No, because you would be punishing the responsible ones who significantly outnumber the abusers.



When you bring up the moral issue of gambling, is it that much different than spending money to go to a movie, or go watch a sporting event? Saying that the latter is a more pro-family activity, just think what you are saying. You bring your child to either watch overpaid celebrities who in “real life” usually care for few but themselves, or to go see overpaid athletes who promote cheating to enhance performance (steroids) and leaving school to follow a career in which a very high percent will fail.


The responsible gamblers see gambling as a form of entertainment and usually follow a budget to know just when to stop.


In conclusion I do agree with the “big picture” of a few of your arguments like corporations taking over local business and the exploitation of poorer communities, you can’t just pin the blame squarely on casinos. If you are going to make a stand, make all the offenders pay not just one of them.


Sincerely,

Riley Barnes
Oregon State University

_________


Dear Fran Eaton:

Hello, my name is Juelia Mabbott and I am a student at Oregon State University. I just read your article about how you think that gambling should be illegal in Illinois, and I just wanted to write to you and tell you my opinion on the topic.


In your article you said “From our nation’s founding through the time of Jefferson, lotteries helped to pay for various community needs. But when corruption destroyed families and communities, gambling was banned throughout the colonies.” I think that the people should be able to decide what they want to do with their money. The Government is not forcing people to go to casinos or to buy lottery tickets. It is the people’s choice.


In my opinion, if the people want to waste their money and it helps the community then I don’t think it’s such a bad thing. People don’t need to let it get out of control, if they know that they can’t handle going into a casino without spending all of their money then they shouldn’t be going in casinos. Or, they should have a specific amount of money that they are going to spend and once they get there they stop. It’s not the communities problem; it’s their personal problem.


You also said “Poor people can’t afford to lose their money in a quest for quick riches, yet they are particularly susceptible to gambling and bet a higher percentage of their income than do those of higher socioeconomic status…. The poor use their money designated for necessities.” This again, is not the government’s problem or anyone else’s other than the person and the family of the person wasting all their money. It should not be illegal to everyone else who can handle themselves and their money because some people can’t.



You also were talking about how “Legalized gambling does not generate new wealth or high-end employment. The jobs that are created seem to be low-earning positions at tracks, casinos, and lotto outlets, and don’t always benefit the locals. Area family businesses such as restaurants, grocers, and clothiers, in fact, suffer most… The $50 spent at a blackjack table will not be spent at the local grocery store or shoe store.”


I know this is a valid point, however, I also understand that it is the people’s choice of the community to spend their money that they need for food or clothes, at the casino. You don’t have any statistics or any references of where you got that the people who suffer most are the grocers, restaurants, and clothiers. I can see how they would be affected but I don’t really know by how much. You said that casinos, tracks, and lotto outlets “don’t always benefit the locals” does that mean that most of the times it does benefit the locals, or most of the time it doesn’t?


I also wanted to bring up the point where you said “domestic violence, neglect, bankruptcy and divorce naturally follow gambling addiction.” Well this may be true, but what about the effects of alcohol towards families? The effects are much worse; and drinking continues to be legal. I found some statistics on the website: http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov. that drinking causes death, injuries, assault, sexual abuse, unsafe sex, academic problems, health problems, suicide attempts, drunk driving, vandalism, property damage, police involvement, alcohol abuse and dependence. To me this is a lot bigger issue than gambling. There are a lot bigger issues than gambling that we can be putting our time and effort on helping to fix.


Thank you for listening to my opinion on the subject, and I hope that I opened your eyes on a few things. Thank you.


Juelia Mabbott
Oregon State University

__________


Hello Mrs. Eaton,


I am writing to you concerning your editorial against the legalization of gambling in Illinois. I take issue with a few of your claims and must disagree with your view about the state’s role regarding gambling.


You state many interesting and compelling facts about gambling, compulsive gamblers, and the potential damage gambling has on society, but I am unconvinced based on your arguments that gambling should be illegal merely because it has the potential to cause harm. The vast majority of people who gamble, according to some studies cited by Daniel Proft, also writing for Illinois Leader, at least 95%, have no problems with compulsive gambling. Rather, most people are able to enjoy gambling as a leisure activity without a guarantee of return on investment, much like moviegoing, shopping, or other activities.


By the logic that gambling should be outlawed merely because the potential for abuse exists, painkillers also should be outlawed because at least a small percent of people become addicted to them and their addiction causes the same financial, family, and social problems that gambling does. When used properly, though, pain medications, like gambling, can be beneficial.


Many people are able to go to a casino with $50, $100, or $200 only a few times a year, play a few games merely for fun, and leave.


Perhaps the best comparison to gambling is alcohol consumption, which is much more dangerous than gambling, both potentially and practically.


Alcohol contributes to the majority of fatalities while driving, ruins many families, contributes to most violent situations, and causes even more social problems than gambling. Nonetheless, most people are able to enjoy alcohol in moderation, not to mention that prohibition of alcohol utterly failed, both at stopping alcohol consumption and at creating a safer society (homicide rates skyrocketed during Prohibition).


I am convinced by your essay only that gambling can have terrible

consequences for a limited number of individuals, much like driving, but also like driving, gambling is not inherently bad. Rather, it is only detrimental for certain people and in a limited number of cases.


The government should not outlaw an activity in which the majority of people enjoy participating and in which the majority of people suffer no ill effects, either. People have the right to choose how to spend their leisure time and their spare money, even if other people may not agree with their decisions.


I also did not find in your essay reason to believe that merely outlawing gambling in Illinois would actually keep compulsive gamblers from gambling. The Internet is a lucrative medium for the gambling industry and, like an alcoholic, a compulsive gambler will find ways to gamble.


Because I do not think compulsive gamblers would be sufficiently deterred since other, easy alternatives exist, the only people who would suffer from a ban on gambling would be the ordinary citizens who do not abuse gambling and use it merely as another leisure activity.


Most Respectfully,


Jonathan L. Bowen
Oregon State University

http://www.illinoisleader.com/opinion/opinionview.asp?c=10569
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
948
Tokens
GO BEAVERS!
1036316054.gif
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,973
Messages
13,439,964
Members
99,346
Latest member
angelkaramoy888
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com