12. XVP: Underage Gamblers
Date: Tue May 20, 2008 4:50 pm ((PDT))Washington has a law prohibiting gamblers between 18-21, but it isn't
enforced and there is no penalty if caught. One law maker recently
said "if they are old enough to join the military they are old enough
to gamble". However, one study showed as many as 40% in this age group
are problem gamblers. Yesterday the Quest Casino near Spokane
announced they will no longer allow persons under 21 on the casino
floor because its the right thing to do.
I find it somewhat surprising that the state passes a law re: casinos that they do not intend to enforce; the industry receives such scrutiny that these are usually laws that are fairly vigorously enforced. In Indiana, as you board a riverboat, guards wish you luck - and ask for ID if you look under 30. If you pass, you get a stamp on your hand. If you look under 30 and don't have a stamp, personnel inside the casino are also supposed to ask for ID - only the stamp can sub. Of course, boarding riverboats occurs through a more easily controlled point of access than is the case in most land-based casinos (including Northern Quest, which I've visited, and where I got an undeserved RF - undeserved because I shouldn't have been playing the short paytable, but I was waiting for a poker seat and had nothing else to do).
But, on the other hand, if there's no penalty if caught (presumably "no penalty" means none for the player and also none for the casino), then you can question whether you really have a law, I suppose. I've always said (not quite the same situation, but still), there is no penalty for speeding, the penalty is for getting caught speeding.
I'm not sure how you WOULD "enforce" a law for which there is no penalty - arrest the person, put them in jail, take them to court, find them guilty, and then send them on their way? If I were charged with a no-penalty crime, someone would have to explain to me (beyond how I get out of jail if arrested) why I should even show up in court to defend myself - why not just "take the conviction" and be done with it, without wasting any of my time?
I would guess that there might be a penalty available against the casino, and if so, then the casino's decision to abide by the law is not just "the right thing to do", it's the way they can avoid the penalty. If I were the casino, I'd make a business decision, balancing the cost of any penalty (including lost business if there's bad PR and/or a license suspension) and the cost of hiring people to "police" the problem, against the business gained (and PR with the under-age crowd) by allowing under-age players to come on in.
The arguments about what age is appropriate for various privileges and obligations is outside my area of interest in discussing this matter - and WAY XVP. But I play in a PRIVATE poker game where three generations of one family send a regular player, and when the 14-year old is at the table, we can count on some of our money going home with him!
--BG
ยทยทยท
=================