3 ms·

If you really believe that argument, why don't we follow it to the logical conclusion, that all crimes should be made into state enterprises. State home burglar

If you really believe that argument, why don't we follow it to the logical conclusion, that all crimes should be made into state enterprises. State home burglary? State cryptocoin rugpull? State hitman? State jaywalking?

cbozeman 2y ago
If you really want to take things to their logical conclusion, kill everyone who breaks the law. Eventually you'll have no lawbreakers. Either because everyone's dead, or because everyone knows they'll be killed if they break the law. Either way, you end up with a crimeless society. Hopefully you can see the problem with "taking things to their logical conclusion."
throw16180339 2y ago
That's a slippery slope argument. Gambling fundamentally differs from crimes like burglary or fraud — gambling is a consensual activity that can be regulated and taxed, while burglary and fraud inherently harm unwilling victims. State lotteries don't represent "state-run crime" but rather transform existing underground markets into legal, regulated alternatives. Illegal gambling operations have long existed, typically run by criminal organizations offering no consumer protections or public benefits. State lotteries provide transparency and channel revenue toward public services instead of organized crime. Following your reasoning would suggest that legalizing and regulating alcohol or cannabis equates to "state burglary" or "state fraud" — clearly an absurd comparison. The objective isn't to convert crimes into government enterprises, but to acknowledge when prohibition is ineffective and provide a safer, regulated alternative.
jayd16 2y ago
As long as you do the math on the trade off of added safety vs added availability and pick the best option in every specific case you can apply the technique consistently to every situation without issue.

3 ms·

If you really believe that argument, why don't we follow it to the logical conclusion, that all crimes should be made into state enterprises. State home burglar

by chabska 2y ago

cbozeman 2y ago
If you really want to take things to their logical conclusion, kill everyone who breaks the law. Eventually you'll have no lawbreakers. Either because everyone's dead, or because everyone knows they'll be killed if they break the law. Either way, you end up with a crimeless society. Hopefully you can see the problem with "taking things to their logical conclusion."
throw16180339 2y ago
That's a slippery slope argument. Gambling fundamentally differs from crimes like burglary or fraud — gambling is a consensual activity that can be regulated and taxed, while burglary and fraud inherently harm unwilling victims. State lotteries don't represent "state-run crime" but rather transform existing underground markets into legal, regulated alternatives. Illegal gambling operations have long existed, typically run by criminal organizations offering no consumer protections or public benefits. State lotteries provide transparency and channel revenue toward public services instead of organized crime. Following your reasoning would suggest that legalizing and regulating alcohol or cannabis equates to "state burglary" or "state fraud" — clearly an absurd comparison. The objective isn't to convert crimes into government enterprises, but to acknowledge when prohibition is ineffective and provide a safer, regulated alternative.
jayd16 2y ago
As long as you do the math on the trade off of added safety vs added availability and pick the best option in every specific case you can apply the technique consistently to every situation without issue.