Minimum age to gamble

Quote: Nareed

You're on to something, but you're missing the point. True, there is no crime and no victim. But that's not the rationale for restricting minors from gaming. Rather think about what rights children and minors have and should have. One area that's very constant is contract law. A minor may not enter into a contract without parental consent. A bet is, in essence, a contract between the player and the casino. Money changes hands in response to outcomes.

As contracts go, it is one of the worst forms, as not all the rules and clauses, or even definitions, are written down. And not only is much of it unwritten, a lot of it is even unspoken (you can play almost any game at any casino without uttering a single word). nevertheless it si a contract and both sides often do abide by the rather nebulous terms.

Now, any minor can enter into a contract with parental consent. In fact most minors do just that. How amny apretns cover their children in their insuarance, or take out abnk aboutns for them, etc? It's a common state of affairs. But contracts such as gaming are too diffuse to simply, say, allow a 14 year-old to carry a permission slip from his mother letting her gamble. Besides, in most contracts involving minors, the aprents are guardians of any moneys, even that earmarked for the child in, say, a trust fund. In gambling that wouldn't work.

This is an interesting legal theory but I am not sure it is actually true. How is gambling really any different than a Chuck E Cheese arcade arcade game where tickets for prizes can be won? There are no problems here with even very young children playing these games which have the same problematic rules as casino games.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Exactly. I'm near 40 and get ID'd everywhere I play. Even by security that know me.

An old trick that every generation thinks is
original is for the guy who's 21 to buy a drink
a give it to the kid who's not 21. That would
get you kicked out of a bar when I was a kid,
now it'll get you arrested and charged with
supplying booze to a minor.

Quote: bigfoot66

This is an interesting legal theory but I am not sure it is actually true. How is gambling really any different than a Chuck E Cheese arcade arcade game where tickets for prizes can be won? There are no problems here with even very young children playing these games which have the same problematic rules as casino games.

Actually, there's a huge regulatory difference. For starters, almost all games in Chuck E Cheese are dexterity or skill games, not purely determined by chance like craps or roulette. Second, the merchandise value of the tickets is swamped by the entry fee; normally it's 50c or $1.00 to play a game, while you might get 5c or 10c of value in tickets.

Such arcade games would absolutely be illegal in a Nevada casino floor, for at least two reasons: the skill element, and the optimal house edge. Conversely, a game like roulette would be illegal in Chuck E Cheese. Regulations vary from state to state. See also:

Woman sues Chuck E Cheese for promoting kiddie gambling

This inevitably raises a comparison with tournament poker.
1. There's no doubt that poker is a game of skill, at least when some time is provided for luck to even out.
2. Nothing of value is wagered once the entry fee is paid.
3. It can be played for free with monetary prizes, some rooms don't even require a deposit. When made, a deposit functions as a refundable lifetime membership fee.

Quote: MathExtremist

Actually, there's a huge regulatory difference. For starters, almost all games in Chuck E Cheese are dexterity or skill games, not purely determined by chance like craps or roulette. Second, the merchandise value of the tickets is swamped by the entry fee; normally it's 50c or $1.00 to play a game, while you might get 5c or 10c of value in tickets.

Such arcade games would absolutely be illegal in a Nevada casino floor, for at least two reasons: the skill element, and the optimal house edge. Conversely, a game like roulette would be illegal in Chuck E Cheese. Regulations vary from state to state. See also:

Woman sues Chuck E Cheese for promoting kiddie gambling

From the article:

Quote:

that the traditional games of skill, such as skee-ball and whack-a-mole, were being replaced by machines she thought resembled kiddie versions of slot machines.

I do agree with this, actually. The "light" ones where you have to stop the dot exactly in the right place, maybe not (but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it isn't skill, as the light will only "be available" to land on the Jackpot every 100 turns.) But we know that the "crane games" and the ones where you have to push a rod into a hole very often are programmed where it would be impossible to win except for the designated times when the computer allows it.

From a different article:

Quote:

Our investigative journalists got curious and spent days and our collective life savings researching this, and we have found out the dark truth, due to the ACC-1 Arcade Crane Controller manual.

This upgrade board controls nearly every element of a crane game, from how long you have to play to how much strength the claw "grabs" with. The board comes with something called a "Guarantee Loser" option. To quote the manual, "this helps ensure that a prize is dropped on the transition from closed claw power to loser claw power."

In other words, the grip strength of the claw slowly drops to 0 percent, low enough that it couldn't hold on to a wet napkin, much less that prized stuffed Pikachu. The conclusion? The next time you're at a restaurant and you want to play the claw game, do what we do and spend the money on hard liquor instead.

http://www.asylum.com/2009/12/15/claw-crane-games-vending-machines-secrets-rigged/

If you are able to program the game to not win most of the time no matter what the skill level, that's gambling. And a lot of those prizes (even in the crane games) are little boxes that say "5000 tickets". So yeah. I think there's at least an argument to be had here.

Quote: P90

This inevitably raises a comparison with tournament poker.
1. There's no doubt that poker is a game of skill, at least when some time is provided for luck to even out.
2. Nothing of value is wagered once the entry fee is paid.
3. It can be played for free with monetary prizes, some rooms don't even require a deposit. When made, a deposit functions as a refundable lifetime membership fee.

I was making a moral argument. It is immoral to throw a peaceful kid or his parents in a cage for gambling regardless of age. I would like to see anyone who voted for anything other than "all ages" or "all ages w/parental consent" address this argument and tell me what gives you this right. It is equally immoral for the government to do it.


I cannot speak to the legal ramifications of various types of gambling, but I will say the market seems to have spoken and kids seem to prefer the types of games at Chuck E Cheese so it appears that in a world where children were free the kids gambling landscape would looks much like it does now except the prizes might have some real value instead of being worthless stuffed animals. or maybe the flip it games could drop coins instead of tickets.

Quote: bigfoot66

I was making a moral argument. It is immoral to throw a peaceful kid or his parents in a cage for gambling regardless of age.

What about throwing the casino that allowed a kid to buy in and gamble?

Quote: bigfoot66

I would like to see anyone who voted for anything other than "all ages" or "all ages w/parental consent" address this argument and tell me what gives you this right.

Let's see... Well, I wouldn't want my son and his middle school friends to go to a casino, dare each other to bet bigger, and martingale away my credit card limit. How's that for a reason? Yes, he can buy an ex-bawks with my card, but an ex-bawks doesn't make you chase your losses.


As to my position, I believe the minimum age for draft and foreign military deployment should be raised to 21. Can enlist earlier, but can't deploy, have the right to ELS/UC discharge any time before 21. That will bring things a little more in line with one another.

General gambling age then should be set at 21 federally. Not the way it's now - rather, in any state, adults over 21 can not be blanket prohibited from gambling, drinking, voting, hiring prostitutes, and whatever else is rated as vice. Think of it as pursuit of happiness. Let individual states set a lower permitted age if they want to, or a lower permitted age with restrictions, no lower than 16.

I actually think certain other vices, alcohol and marijuana included, should also be allowed starting at about 18 with restrictions. Beer and wine only, licensed premises only, no serving if intoxicated, no serving past 12 PM, etc, whatever the locals decide.

Certain games despite having payouts shouldn't be considered gambling at all IMHO. Tournament poker with 10+ participants and 10+ rounds starting stacks, games of skill, machines that have NOT been programmed to guarantee loss or win rates, etc.

deleted

There should be no Federal Laws regulating this, but states should reserve the ability to do so. "For the Common Good" (although I'd argue that most of the time, the regulations don't actually result in the best possible ends, and the free market would do so better.)

I think that 18 is appropriate, because you are an adult. I'd even be OK with younger, as long as there's parental consent. Protecting Contract rights is one proper function of the state, and gambling constitutes a contract, so minors should at very least, have parental consent, or at worst, a State should just restrict the age to 18. I also think most casinos would still require you to be 21, based on different business models. Since there's a drinking age, the market would likely result in some casinos that either don't serve alcohol (very few, I'd imagine) some casinos that let 18 year-olds gamble and ID heavily, and others that only let you gamble if you are 21 or older, if the state allows them to serve anyone 18 and up.

Quote: bigfoot66

This is an interesting legal theory but I am not sure it is actually true. How is gambling really any different than a Chuck E Cheese arcade arcade game where tickets for prizes can be won? There are no problems here with even very young children playing these games which have the same problematic rules as casino games.

Uh huh. And such places are commonly referred to as "kiddie casinos." In a way that is so. In another way not. Kids play for the fun of it as much as for the prizes. So it's not much different than an arcade. There is a set fee to play, too, which again is more akin to arcade games. There is plenty of adult supervision available as well (can you imagine the Wynn with trained child care personnel looking after 10 year-olds at the craps tables?) And as has been mentioned, the games often involve skill.

I won't comment on who has the worse house edge ;)