I would say on this one that VLTs are a matter of choice. I guess I'm mostly Libertarian on the issue as I don't think the Government should get rid of them or curtail their use any more than they already have. I would suggest that the Government is not gouging the poor by having VLTs in the province. The people who use VLTs do so by choice. I am sensitive to the fact that some people have addictions to them, sometimes with devastating consequences. However, does this mean the Government must also curtail or stop the selling of alcohol, cigarettes, junk food or even gasoline (some bad drivers out there)? I think you can see where I'm going with this.
I'm not suggesting that the Government has no responsibility in the welfare of its citizenry, but there needs to be an element of responsibility by the citizens affected as well. Too often people look to the State to say "help me - this is your fault that I'm gambling, an alcoholic, fat, etc). People need to decide when enough is enough. There are resources to help those who are addicted. I don't believe everyone should be restricted from VLT use because some people can't handle it.
You are either be Bernard Lord or owner of VLTs. Governments are there to protect people. That is why we elect them, pay big salaries and expenses for other perks. Now if the government puts those VLTs everywhere then yes they are resposible. Government has duty and responsibility to get rid of them but they cannot. You know why? Because they are addicted to revenues. Lord government especially. It has screwed the province financially and now it is scrambling for revenues.
Um, no - I am not Bernard Lord and I don't own any VLTs. Of course the Government likes the revenue, this is the same reason they regulate alochol... should they close all the liquor stores as well? Why do we not expect the Government to protect us from the evils of alcohol. My question is this: what makes VLTs any different from other Government-regulated "vice" like alcohol or tobacco? Please don't respond with "because gambling causes suicides and people to lose everything!" I say this because alcohol does the same thing (I would argue on a grander scale). So tell me - why should the government "protect" us from the VLTs which negatively affects a few who have addictions and not alcohol, where far more have developed addictions.
As for the comment about me being the Premier or the owner of VLTs - I'm happy to debate civilly, but if you're just going to spout rhetoric and call names - then this blog is about as useless as many of us suspect it has been for a while.
To the person who posted calling the other guy Bernard Lord.... VLTs aren't everywhere... they're in bars and other licensed establishments... which hardly qualifies as "everywhere" as you said.
Sorry! I did not realize calling you Bernard Lord will be calling you names. I can understand your anger. Who wants to be called Bernard Lord after the way he has shown total incompetence.
Your argument is quite distorted. You are basically saying there are other evils why not have some more evils. If alcohol is an evil, then bring on VLTs too. Where you intend to take the society ultimately. I suppose according to you Nova Scotia and other jurisdiction were just crazy when they cut down VLTs. They should have you as an advisor.
While we are at the topic of 'evil' why not legalize marijuana and legalize prostitution. Why not? Alcohol, VLTs, marijuana, prostitution. Let the population have fun and governments can collect more in taxes. That is where this argument of evil is taking us.
hahah, I guess calling me Bernard Lord is the equivalent to calling me names! Anyway, my point is simply this - we expect people to treat other "vices" with responsibility, why do we not expect the same of VLTs? It's not as if the VLTs destroy the lives of everyone they touch...we're talking far smaller numbers than are affected by alcohol, tobacco and "insert preferred vice here". It's the same as the other vices, there are those who are unable to enjoy them responsibly and therefore we call on the Almighty State to tell the rest of us "sorry, you can't use them because these few people can't handle them."
Insofar as marijuana and prostitution, these are questions of personal morality and I would argue that personal morality is hardly absolute. So, I think I wouldn't call my opinion distorted, I'd call it libertarian. I guess some would prefer to refer to it as "evil"... yet another highly subjective term. However, the problem with libertarianism is that it requires people to take a level of responsibility for their own actions... a trait not commonly found in those who wish for the Government to fix everything for them without needing to take any personal ownership of their own issues.
I'm not saying put them on the street corner for all to play, I'm saying leave them in the bars where there's an element of age control. Grown-ups need to realize that on occasion they'll be called upon to be...well... grown-ups. As for the unfortuntate few who did get addicted, there are resources to help them, but they need to WANT the help. This is no different than a substance, food, sex, etc addiction. The answer is not to make it unavailable to people. Nature abhors a vacuum... someone will fill the need (I think we all remember the "for recreation only" VLTs that used to be in every convenience store and would pay if the clerk figured you didn't look like a cop.) So it's going to be there anyway, I'd sooner see the revenue go back into the system than into the pocket of some crook who's beating the system. If you insist on throwing the word "evil" around, I'd say the pirate VLTs fit the bill, don't you?
You did not answer the question about Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions. Nova Scotia is curtailing the number and some States in U.S are making it illegal.Or they wrong? Some consider VLTs as a bandit and immoral too. Why marijuana and prostitution are so immoral? Why not then have them too? They exist anyway as you say VLTs will exist not matter what. Governments are losing lot of revenues by not legalizing them. Where your libertarian is taking us. If there are some evils add some more evils????
As far as "nature does not like vacuum". Who is using rhtoric now? Some vacuums are better not filled-including eliminating crimes and inequality in society. Surely nature is not going to get so upset about such vacuums.
Sorry for not answering the Nova Scotia question, I missed that one. With regard to Nova Scotia and other states curtailing their use, that's their perogative...I'm not saying it's wrong, but I am saying that I disagree with it.
As for legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana and/or prostitution (which is largely ignored by law enforcement now anyway), I have no problem with it since the majority of the popluation would either not use it or choose to use it responsibly. I guess I'm just not a fan of having the government tell me I'm not allowed to do something for the simple fact that a few others can't handle it properly.
Anyway, it's unlikely we'll see eye to eye on this one as I have my opinions on it and so do you. I disagree with your stance but I respect your right to it. So there's really no point in debating it here. If they have yet another referendum on it, you'll vote one way and I'll vote the other... in the meantime we'll live with the results of the last referendum.
Oh, and lastly - I agree with you that some vacuums are best left unfilled... but it doesn't work that way. If Government sponsored VLTs go away, the non-government ones come in. We can cry about how bad that is but it won't stem the tide. They'll bust a few illegals, but if people want to gamble, they'll gamble...regardless of who owns the machines. It may not be right, but it's how it is.
It is possible that if VLTs are eliminated some may be started illegally. It is like any other crime. It depends how good the law enforcement is. Killing and murder are illegal too but people still commit these crimes. So what we do? Put our arms in the air and say ok, let people kill each other or people make free and personal choicees and let them make those choices (libertarian). No you do not do that. You eliminate such crimes. It is the responsibility of the state and government to do everything to stop all things illegal.
"J" makes some pretty good points. People still have to take responsibility for their own actions. With that being said Government is addicted to the revenues and if VLT's get pulled in N.B., casinos will take their place pretty quick.
I missed the point above me while I was typing. It's all of our responsibilities to stop illegal activity , not just government. This is why police have such a tough time solving some crimes. People don't want to get involved.
they gona bring the bulldozers into las vagas next?. LOL!
i played a VLT one time at a bar,lost my money & said to myself i should have spent it on loto6/49,or bingo?,or maybe some cigarettes in hopes of getting canser?,or what about some more booze for my liver?,screw it i'll buy some drugs!.
everyone makes their own choices in life people,if they choose to make the wrong choices then thats their problum IMO. theres plenty of help out their if they want it.
If you make VLTs available as they are then government is being instrumental to help make those choices. Some time people have to be protected from themselves. If everyone made rational decisions then we do not need government, police and courts. All these agencies are too expensive to start with. Unfortunately world is not perfect as you will assume it to be and that is why we all these agencies. Unfortunately at times we get very incompentent governments and that is the case currently in New Brunswick.
The government steals the money from people, using the VLTS; and they think that they are being honest, by tricking them!!...And, so what if people loose their houses and can't pay bills???? They think that they--the people are being stupid....and they have a right to profit from the ignorance of people...People need to be protected from their own stupidity! And, the government couldn't care less!!!!!!!!
Previous comment "It should be added that individuals cannot enforce the law only public agencies such as government, police and courts can do that." True, but we all have a responsibility to report illegal activity. If the police do not have the information, it's much more difficult for them to act. Too many stand idly by.
It scares me when people say things like "sometimes people have to be protected from themselves". I mean, obviously children do, and adults with such significant intellectual disabilities or mental illnesses that they simply cannot make decisions.
But really, beyond that, it's a slippery slope. I think VLTs are a blight. There are bars i just can't go back to because i know i'll see people dumping hundreds of dollars into the damn things at one sitting, people who don't looks like they have hundreds of dollars to burn. it makes me sick.
But really, the principle behind the demand to ban VLTs (some people cannot play VLTS responsibly, so all people must be prevented from playing VLTs), isn't that the same principle behind a law that requires adults to wear a helmet when bicycling? (Charles, how can you be angry that government makes helmets mandatory and also angry that government won't ban VLTs?)
It's also the same principle that prompts governments to infringe on the dignity of people on social assistance by micro-managing their choices.
And seriously, waaaay more people die every year because they smoke cigarattes than because they play VLTs. And way more people die because of alcohol abuse, whether they commit suicide, kill themselves or others driving drunk, or kill their wives in a drunken rage. How can we ban VLTs and not ban cigarettes and alcohol.
Me, I hate VLTs. And cigarettes, actually. And well, ok, i like to drink now and again. :)
I'd like all of them treated the same: not banned, but highly regulated. I think we've mostly got the cigarettes and alcohol regulations rights (except I'd like us to do a bit better job of keeping cigarettes away from kids), but we need to do more to regulate VLTs.
This is why I like Tim Smith's recommendation to restrict their hours. It's a good start, along with reducing their number like in Nova Scotia. Let's try those things, and see if it helps.
This turned into a major essay! Sorry if I bored anyone. Guess I wanted to get that off my chest, lol.
"And seriously, waaaay more people die every year because they smoke cigarattes than because they play VLTs. And way more people die because of alcohol abuse, whether they commit suicide, kill themselves or others driving drunk, or kill their wives in a drunken rage.." Your argument at best is misleading and at worst is dangerous.
All you are saying is that if there are so many other ills ailing the society then why not add another one. Allow marijuana, allow prostitution and allow everything else and then see if people behave responsibly or not. What a balderdash.
I can tell you that VLTs are more dangerous than even alcohol and cigarettes. If you drink too much and you are in public you could be arrested or if you are driving drunk you could be apprehended. If you smoke you stink and people pressure you to stop at least. VLTs addiction or disease is hidden and no one knows. By the time you know it, it may be too late. Then who spends $200,000.00 on alcohol or cigarettes in a short time.
One good thing about your comment is that VLTs should be heavily regulated, hours reduced and numbers of VLTs reduced. That is a good start. Rest of your argument is that "if there is flue going around bring in the plague too. What is the big deal, just another disease."
Everyone that supports unilateral removal of these machines preaches the same thing... "this is government's fault, the government needs to protect us from ourselves, etc". Why does NOBODY on this side want to mention the notion of personal accountability and responsibility? MOST people can play these responsibly, and there's help available for those who want it. I like what someone above said when they mentioned that grown-ups will occasionally be asked to act that way. The hypocrisy of this forum is laughable - the same people who rail against the government making them wear a helmet because it's none of the government's business and then in the same sentence crying about how the government should step in to regulate something you don't agree with. Take a position and stick with it - and try to make your ideas don't conflict TOO much.
To the posted who keeps going on about adding another evil to the world... nobody's adding anything... the VLTs are already here and have been for a while. So if you want to get rid of them, does that mean we get rid of booze and smokes too? Who gets to draw the line and what's the criteria for removal?
As for someone else saying that VLTs cause more trouble than booze and smokes.... smell the coffee.
There's a problem, to be sure, but a few highly publicized suicides come nowhere near the tobacco and alcohol deaths in this, or any other province.
You want to use John Turner's, ex-Prime Minister, argument "that devil made me do it." Ok it is not the government it is the devil who is putting VLTs in all those places. Look what happened to Turner. Same is waiting for Bernard Lord. Over $100 million in revenues and government has nothing to do with it. Why did Nova Scotia government got involved in reducing VLTs? What is so special about New Brunswick? According to you New Brunswickers are the most responsible and accountable people on earth and they do not need any government intervention. Bravo for your beliefs or delusions.
"...the VLTs are already here and have been for a while." Your argument is so fallacious. It is like slave-masters saying that slavery is already here for decades and decades. Why change it and slaves have all kinds of privileges and they will lose it.
Anti-smoking lobby is one of the strongest in North America and making lot of difference.
Anti-drinking lobbies is very strong too including MADD and they have made lot of difference. So what is your problem?
Oh no. You want status quo. Welcome to the land of Bernard Lord. You do belong there-status quo.
Of course you're right... GOD FORBID people should have to take ANY responsibility for their own actions. Please, Government, dictate my morality to me! PLEASE! - What a crock of socialist shit.
You make me laugh with all your railing against the government and everything you perceive as evil in the world. Cry me a river... and then sail to your perfect utopia where we're all protected against our own weaknesses... the rest of us will hang here in the real world. - HA!
Cigarettes are more dangerous and so is alcohol than VLT's if you look at the health and social costs in terms of numbers of people directly and indirectly affected. With that being said, this is by no means an endorsement for VLT's. There's nothing wrong with heavy regulation to protect the kids. As for the adults, it is a personal choice and individuals need to take responsibility for their actions.
To the HA guy above. Yes government is making money from VLTs. Over $100 million a year. Surely prostitution and all illegal drugs when made legal will bring many more millions. Why not? Go ahead. New Brunswick will stand out in the whole of Canada.
You are the smart one in New Brunswick and those in Nova Scotia are living is some kind of make-believe utopia world. Or in jurisdictions where VLTs are completely banned they must be useless stupid people that government has to look after them. You are further deteriorating in your delusions. Christ, Moses, Abraham and many others who opposed gambling must be all crazy people in your book. You must be modern day prophet of vice may be.
By the Mr. HA how much Bernard Lord is paying you to write this. Or did he offer you a job with NB Power. Or promised you that he would take you with him when he goes next to France or other trips that he makes on taxpayers expense.
Dude, just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean he or she is wrong. It's a matter of OPINION, not fact. Your opinion is VLTs should be banned, others disagree. Don't get all superior like those who disagree are wrong: it's long like they're saying the earth is falt or anything.
And also, people who don't see things your way are not corrupt just because they don't share your views. Why can't you argue the merits of their opinions, instead of questioning their charatcer or hinesty, by suggesting they're being paid to write their opinions?
As for Christ, Moses and Abraham: what did they say about VLTs in New Brunswick? I missed those parts of the Bible.
My anonymous 8:47 friend. You'll find a lot of those comments here. Either agree with them or you'll be called stupid or worse. Surprisingly they're the open-minded ones, go figure. You should head to the July archives on Human rights in China. To call it a debate would be giving it credit but there's some interesting dialogue.
If our neigbouring province is cutting down on VLTs then there must be some merit to it.
Now before you start preacing others how to carry on discussion watch out your language, DUDE.
"What a crock of socialist shit." That is a very fancy language of discussion.
You do not even know me and you call me socialist. Getting hot under the collar, eh!
In Nova Scotia all leaders of all religions got together and condemned VLTs. Religions talk about gambling and they did not know at the time that in North America they will call them VLTs. Christ, Moses and Abraham were from middle eastern area. Apparently they did not speak of VLTs as they did not know English. Read your Bible carefully and tell me where it says 'You shall gamble' because it brings revenues for the government. Lord government is hungry for revenues and it is collecting it on the backs of the people who can least afford it.
There was this wacky concept that some held for a while... it was the idea that the Bible wasn't necessarily the only place to find morality or from which to stem laws. I think it was called "the separation of Church and State"... like I said - had some traction for awhile!
Frankly, I am unconcerned about what Abraham or any of his cronies said about gambling, as I don't treat the Bible as a moral compass nor do I think we should base laws on it.
But while we're on the topic of the Bible - I think it also said something about Freedom of Choice. I may be way out here, but doesn't banning VLTs equate to removing that choice?
It's the same notion as banning something to protect the few who can't handle it.
Anyway, I agree with the previous posters that serious debate can't be held here... so I'll side with the guy who said let another referendum decide it. Same idea as in Quebec... let's keep holing referenda until we get the result we want.. charming on all fronts!
In some fairness, VLT's came in under McKenna and Lord did put it to the people and they said keep them. I'd like to seem them gone too but Lord did do what he said, he held a referendum and let the people decide. I doubt the Liberals or even the NDP would pull the plug and if they did, it would likely be replaced with something else. Maybe not, but all parties promise big things and when they get in power, what looked easy often isn't.
No one said that other political parties are saints. But we have to concentrate on here and now. These devilish little boxes are hurting people, their families and children, especially children. What Lord is going to do? Just keep on holding referendums. He is good at blaming previous governments for all that ails nb today. What happened to his leadership? He has been in power over 6 yrs now. When will he quit blame game and actually do something.
Talking about promises. His four ministers made promises to Tim Smith in January of this year to act on his recommendations. Now Lord simply keeps on referring to referendum. So they lied to Tim.
Let's look at realistic free choices. Cigarettes and booze. Again a far bigger social impact and tax grab. Personally I'd like to see them all gone but it is a personal choice. While government is certainly to blame and I have sympathy for those whose lives have been affected. I feel most sorry for the families because they are the real victims.
Let us keep things in perspective. Cigarette and booze have their own lobbies which are doing commendable work. Cigarette companies have paid billions, if I am not mistaken, in damages over the years. There is an ongoing case which I believe is joined by N.B. Anti-drinking lobbies are doing their job.
This group is against VLTs. VLTs are ravaging a havoc and we are fighting our battles. We cannot fight all the battles. You are a reasonable person, you can understand the difference. Can you not?
Not a big difference. It's a social ill and people do have free will. There should be treatments available to those who are more apt to be addicted like cigarettes and alcohol but people do have to take responsibility for their own actions too. This is a big problem in society today. Striking the balance to helping the downtrodden and people who need to take responsibility for themselves is difficult. No one wants to look like they're not caring but doesn't one have a responsibility to look after oneself too? Otherwise you have communism in which government dictates your life. to the 'nth degree I don't think cigarette companies have paid billions in Canada. They have in the US and some provinces are going after the big companies but no decision. I suspect billion dollar lawsuits in Canada would be news. I could be wrong and slept that day. I stand to be corrected.
You keep referring to cigarettes and alcohol. The way cigarettes are now banned from all public places, it will be great that VLTs are banned too from all public places. Government is responsible because it is the government which is providing this lure to start with because of $100+ million in revenues. How can government wash its hands off of its responsibility using the free choice bull and free enterprise bull. It is all cop-out just like referendum co-out.
It has nothing to do with the communism nonesense. Actually it should get out of the business of VLTs and hence less governement involvement and less government. Now it is involved to its teeth because of all the revenues. Hence deeply involved in our lives with both its hands in the pockets of poor people.
Not at all, I like everyone make lots of bad choices. When I do, there's a consequence. It's easy to blame someone else. It's much tougher to accept responsibility. Government's to blame, society's to blame and so is the gambler. The true innocent is the family of the gambler who have to live in poverty or without a loved one. All the programs in the world won't help someone who doesn't want to be helped.
If you broadcast the germs of plague some are bound to get it. Likewise if you have this disease VLTs stationed all over the place someone is going to get addicted. The idea is to remove the germs altogether. If government can get involved and ban cigarettes from public places they can do the same for VLTs. What is the difference?
Up until the removal of V.L.T.s in non - alcoholic business , the irving newspaper printed as many as 5 negative articles a day concerning V.L.T. Any thief caught stealing was made to have a V.L.T. addiction . Any person down on his luck was probably due to V.L.T. addiction . The removal of V.L.T.s in convenience stores was a planned thing by the Irvings to eleminate or lessen competition for his monopoly . A year or two , of 5 negative articles a day on V.L.T.s will impact a persons mind . Allowing a person , egar for control ( Bernard Lord ) to convince the public that these machines do not belong in public view . This being pay back to the Irvings for favorable press and media coverage for his election . After the removal of V.L.T.s , from convenience stores , very few articles were written on this subject . As if the problem now was completely solved , yet V.L.T. revenue was up . This in my mind , due to the fact that those useing V.L.T.s now had there control lessened by alcohol . You should remember that during the referendum on complete removal of V.L.T.s , the Lord government said nothing to the lies of higher taxes , higher entertainment costs , lose of employment ,etc . Mr.Lord allowed the owners and operators to use their scare tatics to buy the votes of the referendum . These owners and operators had a lot to lose and used monies to campainge against V.L.T removal ,while the opposition had very little time to come up with or generate monies to campaigne for the removeal . This government had no intentions of removeing V.L.T.s and basically allowed for a one sided referendum , that was worded very curiously . When V.L.T.s were in convenience stores , visits were made on a regular basis by inspectors to insure the critera was maintain and adhered to . no other form of gambling was allowed , games in full sight , etc . Now we have bars with 5 times as many machines , elegal gamblin ( 50 -50 draws and raffles , back room poker , etc . ) they even went so far as to add pull tab machines for your gambling convenience . And very few inspectors monitoring these sites . Yes our government is addicted to V.L.T.s . Now haveing said all this , do I believe they should be elemiated , NO . but I do believe that putting them where mind altering substances are sold ( alcohol ),is not the answer . I believe people should have a choice to do with their money what they desire as long as it dosent affect others . Why is it that 6/49 machines are not only in bars ? how about bingo ? Wasteing your money on gambling you say affects your familys welfare , I say no , your decision to waste your money on gambling affects your familys welfare . So , can we ban decisions ? or do we only allow decisions to be made at a bar ? MR. Lord has made so many bad decisions with our money , that he can ill afford to lose this revenue . He and his kind have Ontario lawyers to pay for their mishaps like orimulsons deals , and N.B. power deals and the like . ( guess money is better spent out of province then to hire N.B lawyers ). Further more , I do not believe that governments should be allowed to pick and choose who may servive in business , if 6/49 is to be made available to the public , then any business should be able to have operate that source oi revenue . If V.L.T.s are permitted , then anyone in business should be allowed to operate them . What right has the government to decide who can prosper and who has a disadvantage ? . The problem is as I see it , is that polititians work for thier own political and financial future , not for the people who pay their wages . In our case , we allow the Irvings of our society to have enough power to alter the decisions of our leaders . such the case of the L.N.G. situation . If the Irvings had made thier fortune in the bar business and didnt want the V.L.T.s , I'd bet my last buck, they wouldnt be in any bar .
Anonymous 11:20 am: your analysis is good. These goody-two shoes keep saying it is personal choice. Personal choice my foot. It is exploiting and capatilizing on the weaknesses of people.
People fornicating in public park upsets these goody-two-shoes although these morons do not hurt anybody but VLTs do. Ok I am against public park fornication as well as VLTs. They are so vulger as they destroy people and you are right, especially when they are in the bars where people may not know what they are doing anyway, after few drinks. They lose money, go for more drinks and then lose more money. It all falls in the same category - exploitation.
Since you are so responsible, Spinks, you can take the responsibility for all of us. You seem to be Bernard Lord's excuse maker.
Do you have any other point or you just love to repeat yourself? Give some new argument which makes sense. As I saw another post somebody responded to you, and La la la or something like that. Yes broken record that post said.
Hey Spinks, ask someone whose son or daughter has committed suicide because of VLT and they will tell you who is responsible. May be that will open your eyes and you may snap out of tunnel-vision.
Hmmm....as is often the case here, the point is missed. In the issue of VLT's, the government is accountable, as is the bar owner, as is the manufacturer AND the gambler. They're all to blame. THe only innocent victim is the family of the gambler. I would like to see Tim Smith drop by on this debate. From what I read of his protest, he never seemed to abdicate any responsibility. He wanted to warn others about the problem and get the government to act. Very admirable. I'm not sure what a few of the posters here are so upset about. Life comes with consequences. I am sorry if it's the first time you've heard that.
Hey great to hear. Tell Tim to wear his battle gear when he comes in or agree with everything he reads here. The folks above tend to get a little feisty. LOL.
I think the other person was a little harsh when referred to your tunnel vision.
Instead of beating around the bush, do me a a favour and answer following question, Spinks.
If we are so responsible then tell me why need?
GOVERNMENT COURTS POLICE.
They are too expensive. Let us be responsible and get rid of all that stuff. Especially a government which needs money through VLTs to meet its expenses. We should all, being responsible, be able to look after ourselves.
You do make a great point, bathed in some rhetoric but still a good point. We as humans are unfortunately not responsible and can't be trusted. It's a shame we don't all follow the 10 Commandments. It would be a different world. We wouldn't need those police and could leave our doors unlocked at night, but we don't and can't. I am by no means defending VLT's or the government for not having the guts to turf them. I am merely stating that we as individuals also have a role to play. Pick up any paper and look at the courts. Rarely does anyone plead guilty because there's a consequence for taking responsibility for stealing that car or beating up that guy. My singular point and yes I know, la la la but it's not being understood is that the gambler shares in the responsibility.
"We as humans are unfortunately not responsible and can't be trusted." There you negated your own argument of being responsible. Majority of people are responsible but there are some who need help and that is why we have institutions like: Government, courts and police and many other public agencies.
Why VLTs are so hideous? Because government unfortunately is directly involved in this case as it is addicted to revenues from VLTs. Even one suicide is one too many. Life is precious. It is for those reasons that government in this case needs to step up to the plate and not simply relegate to referendums or some other such cop out. Just saying that treatment is available out there is not sufficient and is irresponsible. More pro-active approach is needed. To act upon Tim’s recommendations will be a good start.
Unfortunately every time someone says that government has responsibility here they are accused of being communist.
Clearly you read what you want to read. I know you hate repetition but here it is again because you're missing the point. Government IS responsible, so is the gambler. Family of the gambler is an innocent bystander and should be protected.
Hey Spinks - there's a few of us who read this blog who agree with what you're trying to say. We're reading everything about this and siding with you. Personal accountability is a thing of the past.
It appears there's not much room for opinions that don't fully blame and demonize the Government for every single misstep made by the citizenry on this blog. But then again we have to look at the likely majority of the readership. It's a shame that people get addicted to these things, but neither you, me or even Bernard Lord forced them to put the first loonie.
Just when I though I was going where angels fear to tread. Slightly off topic, Charles a true thank you. You are doing a great service providing a place to discuss NB issues. No one can disagree with your passion. Thanks again.
Yes Bernard Lord did by allowing all these VLTs as his government draws $112 million in revenues. Government is supposed to protect people that is why we pay them this abnoxious amount of money in salaries and stuff. Instead it is using all the means to extract more money from those who can least afford it. Putting these machines in bars is even bigger evil.
Spinks makes no sense. He says people cannot be trusted and then he turns around and says people are not responsible. He should make up his make.
Lord government is incompetent and irresponsible not to do anything concrete about VLTs. Government is a leader and if leaders behave irresponsibly others will follow.
I'm still not clear why there's even an argument why a gambler shouldn't shoulder some portion of the responsibility? That hasn't really been explained by anybody in less than convoluted sentences. I truly want to understand this argument and may not be as educated as some of the folks posting here. I'll accept responsibility for that. I should have stayed in school longer. Can someone explain to me, a poor country bumpkin why no gambler should accept even the remotest bit of responsibility?
Spinks - don't worry about it - you're not going to get anything from this crowd. Speaks volumes about their argument. There's always trolls on here looking to cause trouble and to do so under shadow of anonymity. I respect wanting to stay anonymous as who knows what freakage frequents this page. Anyway - I agree with your idea of personal responsibility - even if nobody here wants to take the argument to a coherent level.
When I saw lot of comments here I started reading them. It looks readers had it with this Spink. But he does not get it. Is there any hope for him that he will snap out his insanity?
I don't agree with Spinks 100%, but he makes a lot more sense in this thread than the people (person) arguing with him. All I see his opponent(s) doing is insulting his character and repeating their opinions. That that, they are doing only semi-coherently.
Spinks may like to read this article in Fredericton paper by Pat Carlson
July 28, 2005
Gamblers caught in middle
PAT CARLSON Consider This
According to a report on July 21 the province will not be spending any more money on addiction services for gamblers as the "need for the service is not exceeding their (the social workers) ability to provide that service."
Ask me if I gave my head a shake when I read that. The answer is definitely yes.
The thought comes over me, am I living in a vacuum? The shelter is filled with addicts who are cross addicted, having two or more addictions, gambling being one of them.
One of my most recent columns spoke of a man who sat in my office, called the gambling hotline, in front of me, to be told that the waiting list was six weeks long. For which, by the way, the province paid $200,000 for just advertising the hotline information.
Now if Minister Jeannot Volpe thinks that a waiting period is not a sign of not enough workers, maybe he should come into the shelter and ask the guests what kind of help they need. If he follows through on his June comment to consider public hearings, I challenge him to have one at the shelter.
He might want to ask what the province can do to best utilize their under-worked social workers. (Wink, wink.) My apologies to the workers that I know are working very hard and feeling just as frustrated as I am, after reading this nonsense.
Let's get real. Having only nine social workers who work with gamblers in a province that continues to make more and more profit from gambling is by all logical accounts, nonsensical.
According to the mentioned article, Atlantic Lotteries Commission's annual report stated that the take, and I use that word deliberately, for the last fiscal year was $1.08 billion. I didn't know we were so rich? Their profits are up, on the backs of the addicts I might add, by some $426.2 million.
How long and how many troubled individuals have to be on these waiting lists before we understand the hotline program is a meagre attempt by the province to look like they are doing something about gambling problems. How many lives have to be lost and how many disturbances in front of the legislature have to take place before the greed is realized for what it is.
To this front-line worker there is only one problem. Too many machines and too much access. Ask the gamblers and they will tell you they want the machines removed from the face of the Earth.
I ask myself every time I do a column, is there something I am not clearly explaining? Do I get calls from the governing party to seek front-line feedback? The answer is no, sadly. The opposition parties, Liberal and NDP, have asked for our front-line opinions, but I guess Bernard Lord never asks for advise, does he?
Excuse my musing, but I cannot help but think that there may be more truth than fiction in that last question.
Somehow I have to find a way to explain what an addiction is and I am now of the belief that few who are not addicted, to a point where they are dysfunctional, ever understand the deepest meaning of this word.
In fact, so sure of this am I, that I have taken the liberty to use what might appear to be grammatically incorrect usage, to make my point.
There is no such thing as someone who is an addict. What I am now offering instead, though grammatically incorrect, is that we have people who are "the addiction."
Let me explain.
If I were a plumber at 5 p.m. I would put down my tools and although I still have the knowledge of being a plumber I would become someone else. My identity would change. I might be a father, a husband, a mother or a volunteer.
When, however, I am "the addiction" there is no 5 p.m. and I am never any of the other descriptors used above. Such is the addiction that I do not ever put it down, nor do I have the chance to become a father, brother, sister or anything else for that matter. I am "the addiction." It has the power over me and I am not free to leave it behind.
Why do we ask for help for "the addictions" in people? Because, until they are released from this prison they cannot be anything else. That includes being a contributing member of society.
Is this not why we need to act and not just talk about changing things?
A provincial profit of $122.7 million on gambling while spending only $757,000 on addiction services is nothing short of unconscionable.
Is it not your turn to call your MLA and state your views? I speak on behalf of the addicts we house. What do you think?
Pat Carlson is an advocate for the homeless and executive director of the Fredericton Emergency Shelters. She writes every second Thursday.
Read it. Great lady, does a lot for the homeless and is a tremendous advocate for them. However to characterize the majority of those who use the shelter as simply people down on their luck because of a bad system isn't fair either. The vast majority are mentally ill or chronic alcoholics. More needs to be done to assist the mentally ill. The rest? Help who wants to be helped but unfortunately few of those who show up at the shelter repeatedley really want to turn their lives around. Most who work with the homeless will admit that privately but not in public because it doesn't do much for donations.
Bad analogy. We're talking adults, you're talking children. However to work with you on this one, if I take all the candy away from the child and he goes and sneaks some somewhere else, he might get fat or get a cavity. That's the consequence despite everything I've done. VLT's are in bars for those over 19. I'd like to see them gone but the problem gambler will still find somewhere else to blow his money until he admits he needs help.
There is no difference between a child and an addict. If you have some knowledge of medicine then you will know that addicts have special kind of hormon in their brain otherwise perfectly healthy. There is no treatment known for such hormon other keep the addictive stuff away. Haromon can become latent if incentives are kept away.
If you remove candy from the home kid definitley will have less chance of eating it and you can encourage better eating habits.
So your adult and responsibility stuff just does not cut. GET RID OF VLTS THEY ARE EVIL. THEY EXPLOIT THOSE WHO have TENDENCY FOR ADDICTION. Government has its hand in the till.
OK. So if we equate these adults as children, who is the parent that looks after the money they're given and doles it out accordingly for power, food, shelter, etc. I don't suspect too many of these adults would like to be categorized as children with no sense of right and wrong and want their freedoms taken away.
It's funny that this discussion has even continued because as you can read in my previous posts we're in agreement on just about anything. Government is responsible and takes the lion's share of the blame for VLT's and the machines should be removed because they're a social ill. The only point we seem to disagree on is the problem gambler. I think they should be treated as I suspect they want to be, as adults. You believe they are like children and should be treated as such. I don't think either one of us is going to convince the other. Ah well. C'est la vie. Have a good long weekend.
Children were used as an example and you are belabouring that point to death. Kids like candy and some adults' weakness is gambling eg. VLTs. Government and some societal paracites(who also make money from VLTs) are taking advantage of such a weakness. But you do not get it. As you will not put candy in front of children likewise it is suggested that lose these stupid VLTs as they are causing lot of harm.
Your argument has been to keep these VLTs and people should be responsible. That is baloney and very irresponsible approach. Once again I will say that ask a parent who have lost a child to VLT. I think there is a case here in Saint John. Tim or Charles know the parents and they will put you in touch with them. Do some research then give opinion.
I never said keep the VLT'S, they should be gone. I just don't consider grown men and women to be equal to children. If they have mental handicapps that affect they're developmental growth, that's different but lots of problem gamblers have families and regular jobs. Do we take it to the extreme as you're suggesting and tell them their children and treat them as such? No. We offer the problem gambler help. It's similar to AA, alcoholics admit they have a problem, that they are responsible for their actions and vow to turn their lives around. Maybe I'm wrong but you're reference to Tim Smith is interesting. I can't imagine any grown man would want to be equated to a child. Maybe he wants to be treated as such. If you know him, you would know better.
You keep referring to mental handicap. With all due respect you do have mental handicap to understand others' point of view. That has been your pattern. It has been pointed out by many.
VLTs are not the way to collect money from people especially when you put them in bars. It is taking advantage of people's weaknesses. It is exploitation.
Why you think certain jurisdictions have altogher eliminated them. Why Nova Scotia has reduced them by such a large numbers? What is so special about New Brunswick. It is a societal evil. Do not tell me that other evils exist, therefore this evil is good too.
Just because you put with all due respect, doesn't mean your statement is respectful. You can insult me all you wish but for the 100th time (give or take a few dozen) I agree, THE VLT'S SHOULD GO. Sheesh, what part of that don't you understand? As for many disagreeing with me I've only seen one anonymous name so until there's evidence of others, it's only you my anonymous friend.
"THE VLT'S SHOULD GO." Agree. End of the discussion. So after all this time you did understand.Ok! in that case, friends.:):)
In the past you did say that rest of us should have the option. Surely there can be better ways to entertain oneslef. But I am glad we agree.
You may consider to talk to families who lost a loved one to VLTs. That is the best evidence you will ever get. One I referred to is right here in Saint John. Ask Charles he will have their phone number.
I've agreed from the first thread and have spoken with Don Bishop. A great man who if VLT's are turfed much will be owed to. He doesn't absolve his son who died of responsibility but holds the government accountable. This is where we got caught up in semantics. I'm with you, they gotta go. My single point is that problem gamblers will continue to find things to feed their addiction even after VLT's are gone until they come to terms with it. My apologies for dragging this out further than it needed to go. I perhaps should have tried to be more clear from the start. The joy of reading instead of speaking.
104 comments:
This is one issue where NB lags behind NS. We need to stop the government's gouging of the poor and downtrodden.
I would say on this one that VLTs are a matter of choice. I guess I'm mostly Libertarian on the issue as I don't think the Government should get rid of them or curtail their use any more than they already have. I would suggest that the Government is not gouging the poor by having VLTs in the province. The people who use VLTs do so by choice. I am sensitive to the fact that some people have addictions to them, sometimes with devastating consequences. However, does this mean the Government must also curtail or stop the selling of alcohol, cigarettes, junk food or even gasoline (some bad drivers out there)? I think you can see where I'm going with this.
I'm not suggesting that the Government has no responsibility in the welfare of its citizenry, but there needs to be an element of responsibility by the citizens affected as well. Too often people look to the State to say "help me - this is your fault that I'm gambling, an alcoholic, fat, etc). People need to decide when enough is enough. There are resources to help those who are addicted. I don't believe everyone should be restricted from VLT use because some people can't handle it.
You are either be Bernard Lord or owner of VLTs. Governments are there to protect people. That is why we elect them, pay big salaries and expenses for other perks. Now if the government puts those VLTs everywhere then yes they are resposible. Government has duty and responsibility to get rid of them but they cannot. You know why? Because they are addicted to revenues. Lord government especially. It has screwed the province financially and now it is scrambling for revenues.
Um, no - I am not Bernard Lord and I don't own any VLTs. Of course the Government likes the revenue, this is the same reason they regulate alochol... should they close all the liquor stores as well? Why do we not expect the Government to protect us from the evils of alcohol. My question is this: what makes VLTs any different from other Government-regulated "vice" like alcohol or tobacco? Please don't respond with "because gambling causes suicides and people to lose everything!" I say this because alcohol does the same thing (I would argue on a grander scale). So tell me - why should the government "protect" us from the VLTs which negatively affects a few who have addictions and not alcohol, where far more have developed addictions.
As for the comment about me being the Premier or the owner of VLTs - I'm happy to debate civilly, but if you're just going to spout rhetoric and call names - then this blog is about as useless as many of us suspect it has been for a while.
To the person who posted calling the other guy Bernard Lord.... VLTs aren't everywhere... they're in bars and other licensed establishments... which hardly qualifies as "everywhere" as you said.
Sorry! I did not realize calling you Bernard Lord will be calling you names. I can understand your anger. Who wants to be called Bernard Lord after the way he has shown total incompetence.
Your argument is quite distorted. You are basically saying there are other evils why not have some more evils. If alcohol is an evil, then bring on VLTs too. Where you intend to take the society ultimately. I suppose according to you Nova Scotia and other jurisdiction were just crazy when they cut down VLTs. They should have you as an advisor.
While we are at the topic of 'evil' why not legalize marijuana and legalize prostitution. Why not? Alcohol, VLTs, marijuana, prostitution. Let the population have fun and governments can collect more in taxes. That is where this argument of evil is taking us.
hahah, I guess calling me Bernard Lord is the equivalent to calling me names! Anyway, my point is simply this - we expect people to treat other "vices" with responsibility, why do we not expect the same of VLTs? It's not as if the VLTs destroy the lives of everyone they touch...we're talking far smaller numbers than are affected by alcohol, tobacco and "insert preferred vice here". It's the same as the other vices, there are those who are unable to enjoy them responsibly and therefore we call on the Almighty State to tell the rest of us "sorry, you can't use them because these few people can't handle them."
Insofar as marijuana and prostitution, these are questions of personal morality and I would argue that personal morality is hardly absolute. So, I think I wouldn't call my opinion distorted, I'd call it libertarian. I guess some would prefer to refer to it as "evil"... yet another highly subjective term. However, the problem with libertarianism is that it requires people to take a level of responsibility for their own actions... a trait not commonly found in those who wish for the Government to fix everything for them without needing to take any personal ownership of their own issues.
I'm not saying put them on the street corner for all to play, I'm saying leave them in the bars where there's an element of age control. Grown-ups need to realize that on occasion they'll be called upon to be...well... grown-ups. As for the unfortuntate few who did get addicted, there are resources to help them, but they need to WANT the help. This is no different than a substance, food, sex, etc addiction. The answer is not to make it unavailable to people. Nature abhors a vacuum... someone will fill the need (I think we all remember the "for recreation only" VLTs that used to be in every convenience store and would pay if the clerk figured you didn't look like a cop.) So it's going to be there anyway, I'd sooner see the revenue go back into the system than into the pocket of some crook who's beating the system. If you insist on throwing the word "evil" around, I'd say the pirate VLTs fit the bill, don't you?
You did not answer the question about Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions. Nova Scotia is curtailing the number and some States in U.S are making it illegal.Or they wrong? Some consider VLTs as a bandit and immoral too. Why marijuana and prostitution are so immoral? Why not then have them too? They exist anyway as you say VLTs will exist not matter what. Governments are losing lot of revenues by not legalizing them. Where your libertarian is taking us. If there are some evils add some more evils????
As far as "nature does not like vacuum". Who is using rhtoric now? Some vacuums are better not filled-including eliminating crimes and inequality in society. Surely nature is not going to get so upset about such vacuums.
Sorry for not answering the Nova Scotia question, I missed that one. With regard to Nova Scotia and other states curtailing their use, that's their perogative...I'm not saying it's wrong, but I am saying that I disagree with it.
As for legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana and/or prostitution (which is largely ignored by law enforcement now anyway), I have no problem with it since the majority of the popluation would either not use it or choose to use it responsibly. I guess I'm just not a fan of having the government tell me I'm not allowed to do something for the simple fact that a few others can't handle it properly.
Anyway, it's unlikely we'll see eye to eye on this one as I have my opinions on it and so do you. I disagree with your stance but I respect your right to it. So there's really no point in debating it here. If they have yet another referendum on it, you'll vote one way and I'll vote the other... in the meantime we'll live with the results of the last referendum.
Cheers,
J
Oh, and lastly - I agree with you that some vacuums are best left unfilled... but it doesn't work that way. If Government sponsored VLTs go away, the non-government ones come in. We can cry about how bad that is but it won't stem the tide. They'll bust a few illegals, but if people want to gamble, they'll gamble...regardless of who owns the machines. It may not be right, but it's how it is.
It is possible that if VLTs are eliminated some may be started illegally. It is like any other crime. It depends how good the law enforcement is. Killing and murder are illegal too but people still commit these crimes. So what we do? Put our arms in the air and say ok, let people kill each other or people make free and personal choicees and let them make those choices (libertarian). No you do not do that. You eliminate such crimes. It is the responsibility of the state and government to do everything to stop all things illegal.
"J" makes some pretty good points. People still have to take responsibility for their own actions. With that being said Government is addicted to the revenues and if VLT's get pulled in N.B., casinos will take their place pretty quick.
I missed the point above me while I was typing. It's all of our responsibilities to stop illegal activity , not just government. This is why police have such a tough time solving some crimes. People don't want to get involved.
Agree that after VLTs are eliminated and illegal activity of VLTs continues we should all ensure that we put an end to it.
It should be added that individuals cannot enforce the law only public agencies such as government, police and courts can do that.
if they ban VLT's then what about casino's?.
they gona bring the bulldozers into las vagas next?. LOL!
i played a VLT one time at a bar,lost my money & said to myself i should have spent it on loto6/49,or bingo?,or maybe some cigarettes in hopes of getting canser?,or what about some more booze for my liver?,screw it i'll buy some drugs!.
everyone makes their own choices in life people,if they choose to make the wrong choices then thats their problum IMO. theres plenty of help out their if they want it.
If you make VLTs available as they are then government is being instrumental to help make those choices. Some time people have to be protected from themselves. If everyone made rational decisions then we do not need government, police and courts. All these agencies are too expensive to start with. Unfortunately world is not perfect as you will assume it to be and that is why we all these agencies. Unfortunately at times we get very incompentent governments and that is the case currently in New Brunswick.
The government steals the money from people, using the VLTS; and they think that they are being honest, by tricking them!!...And, so what if people loose their houses and can't pay bills???? They think that they--the people are being stupid....and they have a right to profit from the ignorance of people...People need to be protected from their own stupidity! And, the government couldn't care less!!!!!!!!
Previous comment "It should be added that individuals cannot enforce the law only public agencies such as government, police and courts can do that."
True, but we all have a responsibility to report illegal activity. If the police do not have the information, it's much more difficult for them to act. Too many stand idly by.
Yes agree. VLTs must be eliminated and any illegal activity must be stopped by the support of all- people, government,courts and police.
Hey Spinks? Could you please send me an email at oldmaison@yahoo.com?
Merci!!
It scares me when people say things like "sometimes people have to be protected from themselves". I mean, obviously children do, and adults with such significant intellectual disabilities or mental illnesses that they simply cannot make decisions.
But really, beyond that, it's a slippery slope. I think VLTs are a blight. There are bars i just can't go back to because i know i'll see people dumping hundreds of dollars into the damn things at one sitting, people who don't looks like they have hundreds of dollars to burn. it makes me sick.
But really, the principle behind the demand to ban VLTs (some people cannot play VLTS responsibly, so all people must be prevented from playing VLTs), isn't that the same principle behind a law that requires adults to wear a helmet when bicycling? (Charles, how can you be angry that government makes helmets mandatory and also angry that government won't ban VLTs?)
It's also the same principle that prompts governments to infringe on the dignity of people on social assistance by micro-managing their choices.
And seriously, waaaay more people die every year because they smoke cigarattes than because they play VLTs. And way more people die because of alcohol abuse, whether they commit suicide, kill themselves or others driving drunk, or kill their wives in a drunken rage. How can we ban VLTs and not ban cigarettes and alcohol.
Me, I hate VLTs. And cigarettes, actually. And well, ok, i like to drink now and again. :)
I'd like all of them treated the same: not banned, but highly regulated. I think we've mostly got the cigarettes and alcohol regulations rights (except I'd like us to do a bit better job of keeping cigarettes away from kids), but we need to do more to regulate VLTs.
This is why I like Tim Smith's recommendation to restrict their hours. It's a good start, along with reducing their number like in Nova Scotia. Let's try those things, and see if it helps.
This turned into a major essay! Sorry if I bored anyone. Guess I wanted to get that off my chest, lol.
"And seriously, waaaay more people die every year because they smoke cigarattes than because they play VLTs. And way more people die because of alcohol abuse, whether they commit suicide, kill themselves or others driving drunk, or kill their wives in a drunken rage.."
Your argument at best is misleading and at worst is dangerous.
All you are saying is that if there are so many other ills ailing the society then why not add another one. Allow marijuana, allow prostitution and allow everything else and then see if people behave responsibly or not. What a balderdash.
I can tell you that VLTs are more dangerous than even alcohol and cigarettes. If you drink too much and you are in public you could be arrested or if you are driving drunk you could be apprehended. If you smoke you stink and people pressure you to stop at least. VLTs addiction or disease is hidden and no one knows. By the time you know it, it may be too late. Then who spends $200,000.00 on alcohol or cigarettes in a short time.
One good thing about your comment is that VLTs should be heavily regulated, hours reduced and numbers of VLTs reduced. That is a good start. Rest of your argument is that "if there is flue going around bring in the plague too. What is the big deal, just another disease."
Everyone that supports unilateral removal of these machines preaches the same thing... "this is government's fault, the government needs to protect us from ourselves, etc". Why does NOBODY on this side want to mention the notion of personal accountability and responsibility? MOST people can play these responsibly, and there's help available for those who want it. I like what someone above said when they mentioned that grown-ups will occasionally be asked to act that way. The hypocrisy of this forum is laughable - the same people who rail against the government making them wear a helmet because it's none of the government's business and then in the same sentence crying about how the government should step in to regulate something you don't agree with. Take a position and stick with it - and try to make your ideas don't conflict TOO much.
To the posted who keeps going on about adding another evil to the world... nobody's adding anything... the VLTs are already here and have been for a while. So if you want to get rid of them, does that mean we get rid of booze and smokes too? Who gets to draw the line and what's the criteria for removal?
As for someone else saying that VLTs cause more trouble than booze and smokes.... smell the coffee.
There's a problem, to be sure, but a few highly publicized suicides come nowhere near the tobacco and alcohol deaths in this, or any other province.
MY GOD??? All these debating comments and Tim Smith is nowhere to be seen!!!!
You want to use John Turner's, ex-Prime Minister, argument "that devil made me do it." Ok it is not the government it is the devil who is putting VLTs in all those places. Look what happened to Turner. Same is waiting for Bernard Lord. Over $100 million in revenues and government has nothing to do with it. Why did Nova Scotia government got involved in reducing VLTs? What is so special about New Brunswick? According to you New Brunswickers are the most responsible and accountable people on earth and they do not need any government intervention. Bravo for your beliefs or delusions.
"...the VLTs are already here and have been for a while."
Your argument is so fallacious. It is like slave-masters saying that slavery is already here for decades and decades. Why change it and slaves have all kinds of privileges and they will lose it.
Anti-smoking lobby is one of the strongest in North America and making lot of difference.
Anti-drinking lobbies is very strong too including MADD and they have made lot of difference. So what is your problem?
Oh no. You want status quo. Welcome to the land of Bernard Lord. You do belong there-status quo.
Yeah! Where are you Tim Smith? Come on in with blazing guns. Or did Charlie scare him away.
Of course you're right... GOD FORBID people should have to take ANY responsibility for their own actions. Please, Government, dictate my morality to me! PLEASE! - What a crock of socialist shit.
You make me laugh with all your railing against the government and everything you perceive as evil in the world. Cry me a river... and then sail to your perfect utopia where we're all protected against our own weaknesses... the rest of us will hang here in the real world. - HA!
Cigarettes are more dangerous and so is alcohol than VLT's if you look at the health and social costs in terms of numbers of people directly and indirectly affected. With that being said, this is by no means an endorsement for VLT's. There's nothing wrong with heavy regulation to protect the kids. As for the adults, it is a personal choice and individuals need to take responsibility for their actions.
To the HA guy above. Yes government is making money from VLTs. Over $100 million a year. Surely prostitution and all illegal drugs when made legal will bring many more millions. Why not? Go ahead. New Brunswick will stand out in the whole of Canada.
You are the smart one in New Brunswick and those in Nova Scotia are living is some kind of make-believe utopia world. Or in jurisdictions where VLTs are completely banned they must be useless stupid people that government has to look after them. You are further deteriorating in your delusions. Christ, Moses, Abraham and many others who opposed gambling must be all crazy people in your book. You must be modern day prophet of vice may be.
By the Mr. HA how much Bernard Lord is paying you to write this. Or did he offer you a job with NB Power. Or promised you that he would take you with him when he goes next to France or other trips that he makes on taxpayers expense.
This is to the guy who wrote at 4:08 and 4:21:
Dude, just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean he or she is wrong. It's a matter of OPINION, not fact. Your opinion is VLTs should be banned, others disagree. Don't get all superior like those who disagree are wrong: it's long like they're saying the earth is falt or anything.
And also, people who don't see things your way are not corrupt just because they don't share your views. Why can't you argue the merits of their opinions, instead of questioning their charatcer or hinesty, by suggesting they're being paid to write their opinions?
As for Christ, Moses and Abraham: what did they say about VLTs in New Brunswick? I missed those parts of the Bible.
My anonymous 8:47 friend. You'll find a lot of those comments here. Either agree with them or you'll be called stupid or worse. Surprisingly they're the open-minded ones, go figure. You should head to the July archives on Human rights in China. To call it a debate would be giving it credit but there's some interesting dialogue.
If our neigbouring province is cutting down on VLTs then there must be some merit to it.
Now before you start preacing others how to carry on discussion watch out your language, DUDE.
"What a crock of socialist shit." That is a very fancy language of discussion.
You do not even know me and you call me socialist. Getting hot under the collar, eh!
In Nova Scotia all leaders of all religions got together and condemned VLTs. Religions talk about gambling and they did not know at the time that in North America they will call them VLTs. Christ, Moses and Abraham were from middle eastern area. Apparently they did not speak of VLTs as they did not know English. Read your Bible carefully and tell me where it says 'You shall gamble' because it brings revenues for the government. Lord government is hungry for revenues and it is collecting it on the backs of the people who can least afford it.
Lets try to watch the language....thank you!!!
There was this wacky concept that some held for a while... it was the idea that the Bible wasn't necessarily the only place to find morality or from which to stem laws. I think it was called "the separation of Church and State"... like I said - had some traction for awhile!
Frankly, I am unconcerned about what Abraham or any of his cronies said about gambling, as I don't treat the Bible as a moral compass nor do I think we should base laws on it.
But while we're on the topic of the Bible - I think it also said something about Freedom of Choice. I may be way out here, but doesn't banning VLTs equate to removing that choice?
It's the same notion as banning something to protect the few who can't handle it.
Anyway, I agree with the previous posters that serious debate can't be held here... so I'll side with the guy who said let another referendum decide it. Same idea as in Quebec... let's keep holing referenda until we get the result we want.. charming on all fronts!
In some fairness, VLT's came in under McKenna and Lord did put it to the people and they said keep them. I'd like to seem them gone too but Lord did do what he said, he held a referendum and let the people decide. I doubt the Liberals or even the NDP would pull the plug and if they did, it would likely be replaced with something else. Maybe not, but all parties promise big things and when they get in power, what looked easy often isn't.
No one said that other political parties are saints. But we have to concentrate on here and now. These devilish little boxes are hurting people, their families and children, especially children. What Lord is going to do? Just keep on holding referendums. He is good at blaming previous governments for all that ails nb today. What happened to his leadership? He has been in power over 6 yrs now. When will he quit blame game and actually do something.
Talking about promises. His four ministers made promises to Tim Smith in January of this year to act on his recommendations. Now Lord simply keeps on referring to referendum. So they lied to Tim.
The commentator above talks about free choice. Now some people will like to run naked on Maine Street, should they be allowed to do that because there is a free choice? Some will like to fornicate in public parks, should they be allowed under free choice. People use these clichés without ever understanding the meanings of it.
As far as Lord is concerned he has proven to be the most incompetent leader there is. Actually it is misuse of the word to call him leader.
Let's look at realistic free choices. Cigarettes and booze. Again a far bigger social impact and tax grab. Personally I'd like to see them all gone but it is a personal choice. While government is certainly to blame and I have sympathy for those whose lives have been affected. I feel most sorry for the families because they are the real victims.
Let us keep things in perspective. Cigarette and booze have their own lobbies which are doing commendable work. Cigarette companies have paid billions, if I am not mistaken, in damages over the years. There is an ongoing case which I believe is joined by N.B. Anti-drinking lobbies are doing their job.
This group is against VLTs. VLTs are ravaging a havoc and we are fighting our battles. We cannot fight all the battles. You are a reasonable person, you can understand the difference. Can you not?
Not a big difference. It's a social ill and people do have free will. There should be treatments available to those who are more apt to be addicted like cigarettes and alcohol but people do have to take responsibility for their own actions too. This is a big problem in society today. Striking the balance to helping the downtrodden and people who need to take responsibility for themselves is difficult. No one wants to look like they're not caring but doesn't one have a responsibility to look after oneself too? Otherwise you have communism in which government dictates your life. to the 'nth degree
I don't think cigarette companies have paid billions in Canada. They have in the US and some provinces are going after the big companies but no decision. I suspect billion dollar lawsuits in Canada would be news. I could be wrong and slept that day. I stand to be corrected.
You keep referring to cigarettes and alcohol. The way cigarettes are now banned from all public places, it will be great that VLTs are banned too from all public places. Government is responsible because it is the government which is providing this lure to start with because of $100+ million in revenues. How can government wash its hands off of its responsibility using the free choice bull and free enterprise bull. It is all cop-out just like referendum co-out.
It has nothing to do with the communism nonesense. Actually it should get out of the business of VLTs and hence less governement involvement and less government. Now it is involved to its teeth because of all the revenues. Hence deeply involved in our lives with both its hands in the pockets of poor people.
People aren't robots and are free to make their own choices. Choices can have consequences. Few seem to want to accept that in today's society.
You are the smart one. Others are not as smart and make wrong choices. Good for you:):).
Not at all, I like everyone make lots of bad choices. When I do, there's a consequence. It's easy to blame someone else. It's much tougher to accept responsibility. Government's to blame, society's to blame and so is the gambler. The true innocent is the family of the gambler who have to live in poverty or without a loved one. All the programs in the world won't help someone who doesn't want to be helped.
If you broadcast the germs of plague some are bound to get it. Likewise if you have this disease VLTs stationed all over the place someone is going to get addicted. The idea is to remove the germs altogether. If government can get involved and ban cigarettes from public places they can do the same for VLTs. What is the difference?
the difference is 112Million Dollars!!!!!
Exactly. Addiction to $112 or $120 million and Lord government is willing to kill for that.
Up until the removal of V.L.T.s in non - alcoholic business , the irving newspaper printed as many as 5 negative articles a day concerning V.L.T. Any thief caught stealing was made to have a V.L.T. addiction . Any person down on his luck was probably due to V.L.T. addiction . The removal of V.L.T.s in convenience stores was a planned thing by the Irvings to eleminate or lessen competition for his monopoly . A year or two , of 5 negative articles a day on V.L.T.s will impact a persons mind . Allowing a person , egar for control ( Bernard Lord ) to convince the public that these machines do not belong in public view . This being pay back to the Irvings for favorable press and media coverage for his election .
After the removal of V.L.T.s , from convenience stores , very few articles were written on this subject . As if the problem now was completely solved , yet V.L.T. revenue was up . This in my mind , due to the fact that those useing V.L.T.s now had there control lessened by alcohol . You should remember that during the referendum on complete removal of V.L.T.s , the Lord government said nothing to the lies of higher taxes , higher entertainment costs , lose of employment ,etc . Mr.Lord allowed the owners and operators to use their scare tatics to buy the votes of the referendum . These owners and operators had a lot to lose and used monies to campainge against V.L.T removal ,while the opposition had very little time to come up with or generate monies to campaigne for the removeal . This government had no intentions of removeing V.L.T.s and basically allowed for a one sided referendum , that was worded very curiously .
When V.L.T.s were in convenience stores , visits were made on a regular basis by inspectors to insure the critera was maintain and adhered to . no other form of gambling was allowed , games in full sight , etc . Now we have bars with 5 times as many machines , elegal gamblin ( 50 -50 draws and raffles , back room poker , etc . ) they even went so far as to add pull tab machines for your gambling convenience . And very few inspectors monitoring these sites . Yes our government is addicted to V.L.T.s .
Now haveing said all this , do I believe they should be elemiated , NO . but I do believe that putting them where mind altering substances are sold ( alcohol ),is not the answer . I believe people should have a choice to do with their money what they desire as long as it dosent affect others . Why is it that 6/49 machines are not only in bars ? how about bingo ? Wasteing your money on gambling you say affects your familys welfare , I say no , your decision to waste your money on gambling affects your familys welfare . So , can we ban decisions ? or do we only allow decisions to be made at a bar ?
MR. Lord has made so many bad decisions with our money , that he can ill afford to lose this revenue . He and his kind have Ontario lawyers to pay for their mishaps like orimulsons deals , and N.B. power deals and the like . ( guess money is better spent out of province then to hire N.B lawyers ). Further more , I do not believe that governments should be allowed to pick and choose who may servive in business , if 6/49 is to be made available to the public , then any business should be able to have operate that source oi revenue . If V.L.T.s are permitted , then anyone in business should be allowed to operate them . What right has the government to decide who can prosper and who has a disadvantage ? . The problem is as I see it , is that polititians work for thier own political and financial future , not for the people who pay their wages . In our case , we allow the Irvings of our society to have enough power to alter the decisions of our leaders . such the case of the L.N.G. situation . If the Irvings had made thier fortune in the bar business and didnt want the V.L.T.s , I'd bet my last buck, they wouldnt be in any bar .
Anonymous 11:20 am: your analysis is good. These goody-two shoes keep saying it is personal choice. Personal choice my foot. It is exploiting and capatilizing on the weaknesses of people.
People fornicating in public park upsets these goody-two-shoes although these morons do not hurt anybody but VLTs do. Ok I am against public park fornication as well as VLTs. They are so vulger as they destroy people and you are right, especially when they are in the bars where people may not know what they are doing anyway, after few drinks. They lose money, go for more drinks and then lose more money. It all falls in the same category - exploitation.
Interesting points. So at what point and what situations do you have to accept responsibility for your own actions?
Since you are so responsible, Spinks, you can take the responsibility for all of us. You seem to be Bernard Lord's excuse maker.
Do you have any other point or you just love to repeat yourself? Give some new argument which makes sense. As I saw another post somebody responded to you, and La la la or something like that. Yes broken record that post said.
Hey Spinks, ask someone whose son or daughter has committed suicide because of VLT and they will tell you who is responsible. May be that will open your eyes and you may snap out of tunnel-vision.
Hmmm....as is often the case here, the point is missed. In the issue of VLT's, the government is accountable, as is the bar owner, as is the manufacturer AND the gambler. They're all to blame. THe only innocent victim is the family of the gambler. I would like to see Tim Smith drop by on this debate. From what I read of his protest, he never seemed to abdicate any responsibility. He wanted to warn others about the problem and get the government to act. Very admirable. I'm not sure what a few of the posters here are so upset about. Life comes with consequences. I am sorry if it's the first time you've heard that.
OhhhI'm certain that Tim Smith will come around some day? He's pretty busy with his little daughter. I must say that he's a great single Dad!!!!
Hey great to hear. Tell Tim to wear his battle gear when he comes in or agree with everything he reads here. The folks above tend to get a little feisty. LOL.
Telling Spinks that he has tunnel-vision is wrong. Tunnel is relatively large. He has more of a tube vision. Just fixed on one black or white dot.
Thanks for making my point again. No one can disagree with you or have another opinion. In most countries that's called communism.
In this Province? It's called- The Irving Way!!!
Ha Ha. Maybe my anonymous friend works for the Irvings.
I think the other person was a little harsh when referred to your tunnel vision.
Instead of beating around the bush, do me a a favour and answer following question, Spinks.
If we are so responsible then tell me why need?
GOVERNMENT
COURTS
POLICE.
They are too expensive. Let us be responsible and get rid of all that stuff. Especially a government which needs money through VLTs to meet its expenses. We should all, being responsible, be able to look after ourselves.
You do make a great point, bathed in some rhetoric but still a good point. We as humans are unfortunately not responsible and can't be trusted. It's a shame we don't all follow the 10 Commandments. It would be a different world. We wouldn't need those police and could leave our doors unlocked at night, but we don't and can't. I am by no means defending VLT's or the government for not having the guts to turf them. I am merely stating that we as individuals also have a role to play. Pick up any paper and look at the courts. Rarely does anyone plead guilty because there's a consequence for taking responsibility for stealing that car or beating up that guy. My singular point and yes I know, la la la but it's not being understood is that the gambler shares in the responsibility.
"We as humans are unfortunately not responsible and can't be trusted." There you negated your own argument of being responsible. Majority of people are responsible but there are some who need help and that is why we have institutions like: Government, courts and police and many other public agencies.
Why VLTs are so hideous? Because government unfortunately is directly involved in this case as it is addicted to revenues from VLTs. Even one suicide is one too many. Life is precious. It is for those reasons that government in this case needs to step up to the plate and not simply relegate to referendums or some other such cop out. Just saying that treatment is available out there is not sufficient and is irresponsible. More pro-active approach is needed. To act upon Tim’s recommendations will be a good start.
Unfortunately every time someone says that government has responsibility here they are accused of being communist.
Clearly you read what you want to read. I know you hate repetition but here it is again because you're missing the point. Government IS responsible, so is the gambler. Family of the gambler is an innocent bystander and should be protected.
Hey Spinks - there's a few of us who read this blog who agree with what you're trying to say. We're reading everything about this and siding with you. Personal accountability is a thing of the past.
It appears there's not much room for opinions that don't fully blame and demonize the Government for every single misstep made by the citizenry on this blog. But then again we have to look at the likely majority of the readership. It's a shame that people get addicted to these things, but neither you, me or even Bernard Lord forced them to put the first loonie.
Just when I though I was going where angels fear to tread. Slightly off topic, Charles a true thank you. You are doing a great service providing a place to discuss NB issues. No one can disagree with your passion. Thanks again.
Yes Bernard Lord did by allowing all these VLTs as his government draws $112 million in revenues. Government is supposed to protect people that is why we pay them this abnoxious amount of money in salaries and stuff. Instead it is using all the means to extract more money from those who can least afford it. Putting these machines in bars is even bigger evil.
Spinks makes no sense. He says people cannot be trusted and then he turns around and says people are not responsible. He should make up his make.
Lord government is incompetent and irresponsible not to do anything concrete about VLTs. Government is a leader and if leaders behave irresponsibly others will follow.
I'm still not clear why there's even an argument why a gambler shouldn't shoulder some portion of the responsibility? That hasn't really been explained by anybody in less than convoluted sentences. I truly want to understand this argument and may not be as educated as some of the folks posting here. I'll accept responsibility for that. I should have stayed in school longer. Can someone explain to me, a poor country bumpkin why no gambler should accept even the remotest bit of responsibility?
What the other dude said. La , la , la and la.
Good comeback. That's about what I expected.
La, la,la. Single tune.
Very helpful. You present your case well and are a shining star. Thank you for answering my question.
Good. See you finally got the answer.
Sure. You don't have an answer.
You said you got the answer but you do not give up and that is your problem.
Spinks - don't worry about it - you're not going to get anything from this crowd. Speaks volumes about their argument. There's always trolls on here looking to cause trouble and to do so under shadow of anonymity. I respect wanting to stay anonymous as who knows what freakage frequents this page. Anyway - I agree with your idea of personal responsibility - even if nobody here wants to take the argument to a coherent level.
Why Spinks keeps going like a broken record? He was given answers but he does not want to hear the answers. He just wants to keep going.
If there is such a thing as cyber-space pollution then Spinks is it. He just keeps adding the junk.
And God love you, you keep reading it. There's hope for you yet, my friend. Thanks for being the audience.
When I saw lot of comments here I started reading them. It looks readers had it with this Spink. But he does not get it. Is there any hope for him that he will snap out his insanity?
I thought I add my voice too.
I don't agree with Spinks 100%, but he makes a lot more sense in this thread than the people (person) arguing with him. All I see his opponent(s) doing is insulting his character and repeating their opinions. That that, they are doing only semi-coherently.
Unfortunately Spinks is the biggest repeater. How can you overlook that?
No, I'm repeating stuff you don't want to hear or admit to. There's a difference or you would have a problem with some of the other posters as well.
Keeps going and going and going! Good for you Spinks.
Hey 4.50 pm dude go easy on Spinks. He runs on Ever Ready batteries.
Energizers. They work longer. :)
Yes Energizer. Sorry Spinks. Thanks for correction. You know your manufacturer well.
Going, and going and going.
Spinks may like to read this article in Fredericton paper by Pat Carlson
July 28, 2005
Gamblers caught in middle
PAT CARLSON
Consider This
According to a report on July 21 the province will not be spending any more money on addiction services for gamblers as the "need for the service is not exceeding their (the social workers) ability to provide that service."
Ask me if I gave my head a shake when I read that. The answer is definitely yes.
The thought comes over me, am I living in a vacuum? The shelter is filled with addicts who are cross addicted, having two or more addictions, gambling being one of them.
One of my most recent columns spoke of a man who sat in my office, called the gambling hotline, in front of me, to be told that the waiting list was six weeks long. For which, by the way, the province paid $200,000 for just advertising the hotline information.
Now if Minister Jeannot Volpe thinks that a waiting period is not a sign of not enough workers, maybe he should come into the shelter and ask the guests what kind of help they need. If he follows through on his June comment to consider public hearings, I challenge him to have one at the shelter.
He might want to ask what the province can do to best utilize their under-worked social workers. (Wink, wink.) My apologies to the workers that I know are working very hard and feeling just as frustrated as I am, after reading this nonsense.
Let's get real. Having only nine social workers who work with gamblers in a province that continues to make more and more profit from gambling is by all logical accounts, nonsensical.
According to the mentioned article, Atlantic Lotteries Commission's annual report stated that the take, and I use that word deliberately, for the last fiscal year was $1.08 billion. I didn't know we were so rich? Their profits are up, on the backs of the addicts I might add, by some $426.2 million.
How long and how many troubled individuals have to be on these waiting lists before we understand the hotline program is a meagre attempt by the province to look like they are doing something about gambling problems. How many lives have to be lost and how many disturbances in front of the legislature have to take place before the greed is realized for what it is.
To this front-line worker there is only one problem. Too many machines and too much access. Ask the gamblers and they will tell you they want the machines removed from the face of the Earth.
I ask myself every time I do a column, is there something I am not clearly explaining? Do I get calls from the governing party to seek front-line feedback? The answer is no, sadly. The opposition parties, Liberal and NDP, have asked for our front-line opinions, but I guess Bernard Lord never asks for advise, does he?
Excuse my musing, but I cannot help but think that there may be more truth than fiction in that last question.
Somehow I have to find a way to explain what an addiction is and I am now of the belief that few who are not addicted, to a point where they are dysfunctional, ever understand the deepest meaning of this word.
In fact, so sure of this am I, that I have taken the liberty to use what might appear to be grammatically incorrect usage, to make my point.
There is no such thing as someone who is an addict. What I am now offering instead, though grammatically incorrect, is that we have people who are "the addiction."
Let me explain.
If I were a plumber at 5 p.m. I would put down my tools and although I still have the knowledge of being a plumber I would become someone else. My identity would change. I might be a father, a husband, a mother or a volunteer.
When, however, I am "the addiction" there is no 5 p.m. and I am never any of the other descriptors used above. Such is the addiction that I do not ever put it down, nor do I have the chance to become a father, brother, sister or anything else for that matter. I am "the addiction." It has the power over me and I am not free to leave it behind.
Why do we ask for help for "the addictions" in people? Because, until they are released from this prison they cannot be anything else. That includes being a contributing member of society.
Is this not why we need to act and not just talk about changing things?
A provincial profit of $122.7 million on gambling while spending only $757,000 on addiction services is nothing short of unconscionable.
Is it not your turn to call your MLA and state your views? I speak on behalf of the addicts we house. What do you think?
Pat Carlson is an advocate for the homeless and executive director of the Fredericton Emergency Shelters. She writes every second Thursday.
Read it. Great lady, does a lot for the homeless and is a tremendous advocate for them. However to characterize the majority of those who use the shelter as simply people down on their luck because of a bad system isn't fair either. The vast majority are mentally ill or chronic alcoholics. More needs to be done to assist the mentally ill. The rest? Help who wants to be helped but unfortunately few of those who show up at the shelter repeatedley really want to turn their lives around. Most who work with the homeless will admit that privately but not in public because it doesn't do much for donations.
If your child is prone to cavities and weight gain would you put tons of candies in front of him and around the house. Think about it.
Bad analogy. We're talking adults, you're talking children. However to work with you on this one, if I take all the candy away from the child and he goes and sneaks some somewhere else, he might get fat or get a cavity. That's the consequence despite everything I've done. VLT's are in bars for those over 19. I'd like to see them gone but the problem gambler will still find somewhere else to blow his money until he admits he needs help.
There is no difference between a child and an addict. If you have some knowledge of medicine then you will know that addicts have special kind of hormon in their brain otherwise perfectly healthy. There is no treatment known for such hormon other keep the addictive stuff away. Haromon can become latent if incentives are kept away.
If you remove candy from the home kid definitley will have less chance of eating it and you can encourage better eating habits.
So your adult and responsibility stuff just does not cut. GET RID OF VLTS THEY ARE EVIL. THEY EXPLOIT THOSE WHO have TENDENCY FOR ADDICTION. Government has its hand in the till.
Dr. Knowall.
OK. So if we equate these adults as children, who is the parent that looks after the money they're given and doles it out accordingly for power, food, shelter, etc. I don't suspect too many of these adults would like to be categorized as children with no sense of right and wrong and want their freedoms taken away.
Your problems is that you want to have government its addiction for $122 million a year looked after. What a crime against humanity?
It's funny that this discussion has even continued because as you can read in my previous posts we're in agreement on just about anything. Government is responsible and takes the lion's share of the blame for VLT's and the machines should be removed because they're a social ill. The only point we seem to disagree on is the problem gambler. I think they should be treated as I suspect they want to be, as adults. You believe they are like children and should be treated as such. I don't think either one of us is going to convince the other. Ah well. C'est la vie. Have a good long weekend.
Children were used as an example and you are belabouring that point to death. Kids like candy and some adults' weakness is gambling eg. VLTs. Government and some societal paracites(who also make money from VLTs) are taking advantage of such a weakness. But you do not get it. As you will not put candy in front of children likewise it is suggested that lose these stupid VLTs as they are causing lot of harm.
Your argument has been to keep these VLTs and people should be responsible. That is baloney and very irresponsible approach. Once again I will say that ask a parent who have lost a child to VLT. I think there is a case here in Saint John. Tim or Charles know the parents and they will put you in touch with them. Do some research then give opinion.
I never said keep the VLT'S, they should be gone. I just don't consider grown men and women to be equal to children. If they have mental handicapps that affect they're developmental growth, that's different but lots of problem gamblers have families and regular jobs. Do we take it to the extreme as you're suggesting and tell them their children and treat them as such? No. We offer the problem gambler help. It's similar to AA, alcoholics admit they have a problem, that they are responsible for their actions and vow to turn their lives around. Maybe I'm wrong but you're reference to Tim Smith is interesting. I can't imagine any grown man would want to be equated to a child. Maybe he wants to be treated as such. If you know him, you would know better.
You keep referring to mental handicap. With all due respect you do have mental handicap to understand others' point of view. That has been your pattern. It has been pointed out by many.
VLTs are not the way to collect money from people especially when you put them in bars. It is taking advantage of people's weaknesses. It is exploitation.
Why you think certain jurisdictions have altogher eliminated them. Why Nova Scotia has reduced them by such a large numbers? What is so special about New Brunswick. It is a societal evil. Do not tell me that other evils exist, therefore this evil is good too.
Just because you put with all due respect, doesn't mean your statement is respectful. You can insult me all you wish but for the 100th time (give or take a few dozen) I agree, THE VLT'S SHOULD GO. Sheesh, what part of that don't you understand? As for many disagreeing with me I've only seen one anonymous name so until there's evidence of others, it's only you my anonymous friend.
"THE VLT'S SHOULD GO." Agree. End of the discussion. So after all this time you did understand.Ok! in that case, friends.:):)
In the past you did say that rest of us should have the option. Surely there can be better ways to entertain oneslef. But I am glad we agree.
You may consider to talk to families who lost a loved one to VLTs. That is the best evidence you will ever get. One I referred to is right here in Saint John. Ask Charles he will have their phone number.
I've agreed from the first thread and have spoken with Don Bishop. A great man who if VLT's are turfed much will be owed to. He doesn't absolve his son who died of responsibility but holds the government accountable. This is where we got caught up in semantics. I'm with you, they gotta go. My single point is that problem gamblers will continue to find things to feed their addiction even after VLT's are gone until they come to terms with it. My apologies for dragging this out further than it needed to go. I perhaps should have tried to be more clear from the start. The joy of reading instead of speaking.
Post a Comment