|
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
classic case of people not accepting responsibilty at all for their own actions.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect a casino to have enough staff to monitor the premises and watch out for people displaying unusual behaviour that might be indicative of a problem (like gambling at a slot machine for 5 hours straight). no one has a "right" to be there, so if staff thinks a person is displaying symptoms of addiction, they can ask them to leave. just like a bartender can (and is required to) refuse service to someone who appears intoxicated.
To suggest that casinos *ought* to be using high-tech surveillance, photo database, etc. is unreasonable.
We put an onus on bars, liquor stores, etc. to be vigilant and not serve alcohol to people who appear intoxicated...but we don't expect some high-tech detection system to be put in place to ensure that self-proclaimed alcoholics can't buy booze |
although I agree....what needs to be determined is what is reasonable and prudent for the OLG to do. Any casino I have gone to in Ontario has just let me walk in. If you look under age then they check your ID...none of them have checked to see if I was on the self banning list. I don't think the OLG will allow this to go to trial but if it does it could set an interesting precedent.
___________________
| quote: | | Scott has been introduced to the rave scene, and Ecstasy, by Craig. The two of them go out on the weekends, with some of Craigs friends, and stay up all night, dancing in a drug-fueled trance. |
Last edited by Moral Hazard on Apr-26-2011 at 07:48
|