[edflsafoiewq]

> 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.

[woofcat]

>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.

[apta]

> 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.

[icebraining]

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.

[a1369209993]

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.