|
In conclusion, we can say that the government is
evading part of its responsibilities insofar as
it presents this complex social problem as
having its roots more in individual weakness
than in collective failure, while government
itself is the main operator of casinos and other
forms of gambling. As long as these aspects of
the matter are not debated, we will continue to
produce more and more so-called compulsive
gamblers, and witness more and more cases of
suicide, family violence, homelessness, and the
other consequences of problem gambling. Finally,
assuming that gambling is here to stay, the
government could accept its share of
responsibility and act accordingly, i.e. work to
scale down this fundamental ambiguity in its
words and its deeds, since for the time being,
it is contributing directly to the creation of
conditions propitious to gambling and the sale
of visions of utopia, especially to the least
socially and economically privileged members of
society. As Pfohl said, “sick gamblers” only
exist in relation to those who attempt to
control them.
tribe gaming compact— no more that 2,000 gaming
devices for a single tribe and no mo re than
45,000 in the
entire state; and cannot offer many Nevada-style
games such as craps or roulette (Bear Stearns
2000).
Most California rancherias are located in rural
areas, a considerable distance from large
consumer
markets in urban areas. The sta te of California
restricts television and radio advertisements
for casinos.
And the industry as a whole is characterized by
moderate competition because tribes both enjoy a
monopoly on casino gambling in California, and
have formed several organizations to coordinate
practices and operations (especially the
National Indian Gaming Association (NIGA) and
its California
branch (CNIGA)).
Back to casino
news
|
