> And this is why gambling should be banned

How do you propose to enforce this? If these two people had simply gambled the same way, and the loser took out the mortgage and paid the winner, nobody would even know.

It's illegal to gamble where I live, yet every year my friends and I place bets on major sporting events.

The solution to problems isn't always more government. Particularly when the proposed laws are totally unenforceable.

> How do you propose to enforce this?

Don't legally recognize gambling debts. If people lose a bet they can pay it if they want to, but the law wouldn't recognize or enforce the debt.

This appears to be basically what happened in this case anyway.

>Don't legally recognize gambling debts. If people lose a bet they can pay it if they want to, but the law wouldn't recognize or enforce the debt.

This is how you get people with broken legs. As much as I dislike the payday loan places... they largely eliminated loan sharks.

You have legal gambling to keep it out of the hands of organized crime who will collect with illegal methods... not through the courts.

> Don't legally recognize gambling debts. If people lose a bet they can pay it if they want to, but the law wouldn't recognize or enforce the debt.

Correct, and you take it a step farther. People don't pay even if they want, both parties engaging in gambling are penalized.

To penalize them, you have to identify them first. Gambling is like corruption, in that two innocent activities (a game and a transfer of money) are combined, and you need to prove that link to prove that gambling occurred.

To be fair, what you actually accomplish there is not to ban gambling, but just to limit it to table stakes. Though that's probably a more useful goal anyway.

Banning gambling doesn’t ban gambling.

It just drives it underground where knuckle-breakers get to make and enforce the rules.

Then you crack down on such sites. It will prevent the vast majority of gambling from taking place, which will be a net plus on society.

It will not. First, large numbers of people will still gamble, and pay a far higher price to do so.

Sports betting is illegal in my state, yet the poker games at my local casino has always been full of bookies taking bets from other players, at significantly worse lines and higher vig than legal book makers in Vegas charge. And sometimes stiffing winners clients after they have a big win, or using threats of violence to collect from big losers.

A few years ago the poker room had to shut down fir nearly 6 months due to a flood. Private games spring up all over town, and instead of taking $126 an hour ($14 per player per hour) like the casino, they raked as three and four times as much. In one game a friend of mine saw the dealer cashed out $2500 in “tips” from her shift. she had been skimming from the pots and the “host” claims he wasn’t in on it. With no cameras, floor management, security etc, they are lucky they didn’t just get hit by a home invasion given the tens of thousands in cash at each game.

Legalized gambling doesn’t just save lives by keeping it out of organized crime control, it makes it far less costly for participants, and making its negative impacts on society much lower. In a competitive market the rake/vig is much lower, playing poker for $14 an hour has much more limited personal impact than playing it for $50/hour.

Lastly legal gambling can enforce rules to protect players from their worst instincts. One example is banning collection of gambling debts to help ensure players only play with what they can afford to lose.

> Sports betting is illegal in my state, yet the poker games at my local casino...

So gambling is still allowed in your state. I'm saying to ban it completely so the entire market is closed.

It won't be too difficult to crack down on private gambling sites as well. The issue in the US is that each state has its own laws, so this won't work unless there is a ban at the federal level.

> Legalized gambling doesn’t just save lives by keeping it out of organized crime control, it makes it far less costly for participants, and making its negative impacts on society much lower.

I don't agree. There are countries where gambling is banned, and they don't have a gambling or crime problem.

You ignore what I said and ignore reality. I gave real examples of two real gambling markets, one legal and illegal, that demonstrated how much worse the effects of the illegal market were.

Instead you claim countries have successfully banned gambling completely. OK name one so we can correct your misapprehension.

For example Sports betting has been illegal almost everywhere in the US for a long time. Illegal sports gambling has peaked near $150B a year.

Gambling is banned in Saudi Arabia.

Yet people still gamble in Saudi Arabia like crazy.

What’s next, you gonna want to ban gravity cause your feet are sore?

> There are countries where gambling is banned, and they don't have a gambling or crime problem.

Like which? The only democracy I see that (almost) fully banned gambling seems to be Israel, and their underground gambling industry is estimated at $3.5 billion.

The world is more than just "democratic" nations (which, are also usually "democratic" by name, but are actually something else).

Not sure I follow? If two people have a 'rational' bet, then is that legal in your eyes? Surely you can't be saying that irrational actions should be illegal, or that gambling on 'irrational' decisions (however one might even try to define that) should be banned? Or that all gambling should be banned, because there is a chance that some bets might be irrational? None of those viewpoints seem to make any kind of sense, as far as I can see?

Gambling is strictly harmful to society. There is no reason it should be permitted. It's quite straight forward.